INTERNSHIP DIARY

Amity University Noida,Uttar Pradesh

Amity Law School II
Under the Guidance and Supervision of
Advocate Basant Kumar Gupta
(District Court,Agra)
In District Session Court,Agra (Uttar Pradesh)

Submitted by:
Shruti khandelwal
B.A.LL.B(H)
Section B
A11911115113
2015-2020

Submitted to:
Priyanka Ghai

Day 1: 20th May,2016

Timings: 8:30 a.m to 12:30 p.m
Introduced to the work that is carried out by Advocates. Introduced how to handle
a client. Taught about the court proceedings and how judges give judgement and
how they review the report file of a case submitted by client`s Advocate.
Two case proceedings took place :Both for Rent dueCase1:Vijay Krishna Dadhich v. Shrimati Veena and others
Address of the house Rampura, Kota.
Fought from the side of defendant i.e Shrimati Veena and others.
Facts: She has own house in Rampura, Kota. Vijay was a tenant in her house. He
gave Rs. 5,000 per month to her. But her tenant had not given rent since past few
months and she has filed a suit against him for the payment of the dues.
Judgement is pending.

Day 2: 21th May,2016

Timings:8:30 a.m to 12:30 p.m
Taught the procedure of making a case report file :-

- Firstly, a legal notice is sent by the plaintiff to the defendant warning

him/her of the consequences which he/she may face in future if ignored the
notice.
- Then,the reply,if defendant give within stipulated time its fine and case is
not filed.
If ignored the legal notice, then the case is filed against the defendant and a
legal notice is served to the defendant.
- Both the parties heir their advocates to fight the case in the court of law.
- Then,facts are affixed from the side of plaintiff to which defendant if wants
may counter reply and may corrects the points mentioned by the plaintiff.
- Then, facts are also taken and noted from the side of defendant and if any
objection arises from the side of plaintiff, he/she counter replies it.
- After analyzing and stating facts from both sides, witnessess`s names are
stated and their statement are being jotted down.
- Any essential proof documents if needed to be attached, they arwe affixed
and a report is finally prepared to be reviewed by the judge.
Learnt to wright the legal notice.
Subject: Legal Notice U/S 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act,1881.
Dear Sir,
Under instructions from and on behalf of my client resident of Brijraj
Bhawan,Civil Lines,Kota, we hereby serve upon you the above Noticee this
legal notice to the following effect:1. That our client vide sale deed dated 2.10.2013 sold land in total 8 jhumla
Rakba 2.57 Hectre situated at village Rampura,Tehsil Ladpur,Zila Kota
for an amount of Rs. 3,40,00,000 (Rupees Three Crore and Forty Lacs
only).
2. That you the Noticee in discharge of your liabilty of Rs. 3,40,00,000/handed over two cheques dated 02.01.2013 to our client bearing No.
912809 and 912810 all drawn on Punjab National Bank,Bhim Ganj

Mandi, Kota for an amount Rupees forty lacs and Rupees Three Crore
respectively.
3. That you, the Noticee duly accepted the possession of the land in
question pursuant to execution of sale deed. The payment towards sale
consideration had become due upon execution of sale deed and handing
over peaceful possession of land in your favor by our client on
21.01.2103. That you the Noticee assured our client that the cheques
would be duly honored on presentation in discharge of your liability.
4. That you, the Noticee orally requested client to present the two cheques
after sometime. Our client, keeping into account the good relations with
you Noticee agreed to you request and waited for sometime to present the
cheques.
5. That our client then after waiting for the agreed time to lapse, our client
presented the cheques bearing no. 912809 and 912810 drawn on Punjab
National Bank,Bhim Ganj Mandi, Kota for an amount Rs. 40,00,000/and Rs. 3,00,00,000/- respectively on 25.03.2013 to its banker at Punjab
National Bank,Kota.
6. That to the utter dismay the said cheques bearing no. 912809 and 912810
drawn on Punjab National Bank were returned as unpaid by the bank vide
memo dated 25.03.2013 with remarks`Payment stopped by Drawer`. Be
notified that the said dishonour due to the non-payment by virtue of the
instructions of you the Noticee of `Payment Stopped` entails all
consequences mandated under Section 138 and 142 of the Negotibale
Instruments Act as the said dishonour is in law similar to dishonour due
to insufficient funds and hence the present notice is being issued to you
the Noticee under the said provisions of law.
7. That you the Noticee deliberately, with ill intention, issued and/or got
issued to our Client the above said cheque knowing fully well that the

same would be dishonored on its presentation. By these acts of yours,

you the above said Noticee have failed to discharge your legal liability
and committed the offence under Section 138 read with Section 142 of
the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1860 (as amended from time to time).
8. The aforesaid facts and circumstances and under instructions from our
client, thereby notify you and call upon you the Noticee, to make the
payment of the aforesaid dishonored cheques amount i.e Rs.
3,40,00,000/- within 15 days from the date of receipt of this notice,
failing which our client would be constrained to take recourse to the
above said legal proceedings and in that case you shall be liable for the
risks costs and consequences resulting therefrom.
9. The trust that you shall comply with the reqisites within time to obviate
the necessity of any unpleasant steps having to be taken against you the
Noticee such be instructed shall be at your entire cost and consequences.
The present notice is being served without prejudice to all other civil and
criminal remedies available to our client.
Ignore this notice at you own risk as to cost and consequences.
(Advocate)

Day 3: 22th May,2016

Timings: 8:30 a.m to 12:30 p.m
Case1: Ramchandra v. Indra Kumar and others
[for rent due]
Case no. 176/2015
Fought from the side of defendant i.e Indra Kumar.
Section 9 of CPC

Facts: Address of the shop which is on rent shop no. 203, Indra market,
Kota. According to the defendant i.e Indra Kumar, he gave rent Rs. 2,800/per mobnth except water and light rent. The shop which according to the
plaintiff was to be used by his son Vimal, is still empty and only the display
board is fixed and nio working is done there still.
According to plaintiff, defendant has not paid rent since months. But
according to defendant, plaintiff is a fraud. He always for his tenants, makes
an excuse about his son Vimal, that he needs a shop and then force the
tenants to empty the shop. While, he already have an independent and have a
property too which is running well. According to defendant, after repititive
reminder from defendant also, plaintiff did not provide them with the receipt
of payment of rent with an excuse that some work is being carried on and
that he will give the recepit of all pending months together and on this trust,
defendant kept on giving rent without receiving any recepit. Defendant has a
proof that plaintiff does or craets this nuisance with all his tenants and that
on his charge only he has filed a false case against defendant.
Judgement is pending.

Day 4: 23th May,2016

Timings: 8:30 a.m to 12:30 p.m
Case1: Criminal case
Maisars Zeydon Jentek Ltd. V. Maxon Organics Private Ltd.
Case no.- 731/2013
Section 138 of Companies Act,2013.
Fought from the side of plaintiff.
Facts: Maisars Zeydon Jentek Ltd. Is a public company and Maxon
Organics Private Ltd. Is a private company. Public company deals with
chemicals which was to be supplied to the private company on 4th December,

2012. Private Company`s second partner signed the assent of supplying

chemicals. 3rd and 4th partner also knew about this agreement. From the side
of first partner, a cheque of Rs. 3,00,000 was given to the public company, it
was of H.D.F.C bank and was assured that he will get the money encashed
for sure. But, cheque was returned back to the owner of private Company.
Later, it was discovered that there was not this much amount in his account
and this owner of Private company was well aware of the fact in advance
only. He committed fraud as he knew cash will not be encashed by the
cheque through this account.
Public Company`s owner pleads to get Rs. 3,00,000 which was due and the
partners of private company to be jailed and Rs. 3,00,000 to be taken from
them as compensation to him i.e total Rs. 6,00,000 any other help if can be
provided by the law, he will receive.
Judgement is pending.

Day 5: 26th May,2016

Timings: 8:30 a.m to 12:30 p.m
Case 1: Narendra Kumar Sharma v/s Nathulal Sharma
Fought from the side of plaintiff i.e Narendra Kumar Sharma, son of Late
Mr. Ashok Kumar Sharma and Mrs. Sheela Sharma wife of Late Mr. Ashok
Kumar Sharma.
Property Dispute [ wrongfully confiscated]
Facts: After the death of Mr. Ashok Kumar, his property was to be given to
his only son, Narendra Kumar. But some dispute happened between Ashok`s
wife and his family and shifted with her son to another place. Later she came
to know that property was given to Nathulal`s wife. They had a fake
signature of Late Kumar Sharma and had fake document as a proof, they had
confiscated Ashok`s property which was legally to be given to his only son,
Narendra Kumar Sharma.

Judgement is pending.

Case 2: Devi Singh v/s Advocate Khan and others

Case no. 19/16 C.S
Facts: Fought on the side of plaintiff i.e Devi Singh
Plaintiff and defendant knew each other since long. Advocate Khan needed
Rs. 3,00,000 for his own household necessity and out of trust Devi Singh
lend him this amount. While returning back, defendant gave a cheque to the
plaintiff of Rs. 3,00,000 which later on dishonored twice due to insufficient
amount in the account. After this also, plaintiff kept pleading for his amount
to the defendant, but there was no response. Then, plaintiff with the help of
his advoacte gave a legal notice to the defendant, he did not response to this
too. Plaintiff , finally filed a suit against defendant demanding his Rs.
3,00,000 which he lend to the defendant in mutual trust.
Judgement is pending.

Day 6: 27th May,2016

Timings: 8:30 a.m to 12:30 p.m
Case 1: Ashok Kumar Jain v/s Sidhharth Mittal
Fought from the side of appelant i.e. Ashok Kumar.
Facts: Sidhharth Mittal i.e. the defendant is a C.A. and his wife too is a C.A.
He pleads that he wants to establish his own office in which he can practice
his chartered accountancy as they don`t have any job or business right now
nor do they have any such big place as to establish their office which needs a
library, place for clients and other officers to work and esatblish their
business.
While, the plaintiff pleads in defence that defendant already have many
coaching centres, one in which both of them are at the director post and in
the second coaching they are at the post of senior faculty. In one building,
they have many big rooms out of which some are empty in the building, in

first and second floor. Hence, it is not needed for him to order Ashok Kumar
by his plead that he don`t have any other room for her work and on this
ground Ashok Kumar is not under compulsion to empty the room.
Judgement is pending.

Case2: Amit Pancholi v/s Shrimati Usha Sharma and others

Case no. 103/2011
Fought from the side of plaintiff i.e Amit Pancholi.
Section 372 of Indian Succession Act,1925.
Facts: Sri Laxman Narayan Pancholi and his wife was grandparents of Amit
Pancholi. Laxmi Narayan had three daughters and no son. He and his wife
had left will in the name of his three daughters and one grandson to which
grandparents were very much attached. But some amount was there in the
bank also to which he had not left any will. According to Indian Succession
Act, Amit was only grandson and was closest to him in relation and majority
of his propert was to be given to him only so, it should be given to him
whatever amount is there in bank.
Judgement is pending.

Day 7: 28th May,2016

Timings: 8:30 a.m to 12:30 p.m
Case 1: Budh Singh v/s Bahadur Singh
Fought from the side of plaintiff i.e. Budh Singh
Case no. 75/10
Discussed this case in the court of law.