DO Retrieved - Asp

IN THE COURT OF SH.
AMAR NATH: DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE:

NEW DELHI
ARB no. 1106/13

HDFC Bank Ltd. Vs. Rajiv Ranjan
31.03.2015
Present:
Shri Harsh Sinha, Ld. Counsel for the petitioner.

Ld. Counsel for the petitioner states that award with regard to the
agreement no. 13545231 dated 21.08.2008 has been passed.
He wishes to
make the statement. Let his statement be recorded.

( AMAR NATH )
District & Sessions Judge
New Delhi/31.03.2015
Statement of Shri Harsh Sinha, Advocate for the petitioner company, Enrl.
No. D-1477/04.
On S.A.
I have instructions to make the statement being the counsel for the
petitioner.
As per instructions,
I state that the petitioner does not wish to
continue with this arbitration petition as an award has already been passed by
the Ld. Arbitrator. Order dated 18.04.2013 be merged with the Arbitral Award as
referred to above. My statement shall be bound upon the petitioner as the same
has been made under its instructions.
RO&AC
( AMAR NATH )
-2Order
I have perused the statement made by the counsel for the petitioner
company. Order dated 18.04.2013 for repossessing the vehicle make MARUTI
WAGON R LX bearing Registration No. UP14AR5452 by appointing the receiver
is merged with the arbitral award.
Award has been passed in view of the order
dt. 18.04.2013 u/s 9 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996. Petitioner is at
liberty to deal with the vehicle in terms of the award. Nothing remains to be
survived. File be consigned to record room.
Copy of order be given dasti as
prayed for.
( AMAR NATH )
IN THE COURT OF SH. AMAR NATH: DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE:

NEW DELHI
ARB no. 1104/13

HDFC Bank Ltd. Vs. Aman Khan
31.03.2015
Present:

He wishes to

( AMAR NATH )
No. D-1477/04.
On S.A.
petitioner.
RO&AC
( AMAR NATH )
-2Order
ALTO VXI K-10 bearing Registration No. UP14BM6936 by appointing the receiver
prayed for.
( AMAR NATH )

NEW DELHI
ARB no. 1112/13

HDFC Bank Ltd. Vs. Alim Khan
31.03.2015
Present:

He wishes to

( AMAR NATH )
No. D-1477/04.
On S.A.
petitioner.
RO&AC
( AMAR NATH )
-2Order
WAGON R LXI bearing Registration No. UP16T0379 by appointing the receiver is
merged with the arbitral award. Award has been passed in view of the order dt.
30.03.2013 u/s 9 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996. Petitioner is at liberty
to deal with the vehicle in terms of the award. Nothing remains to be survived.
File be consigned to record room. Copy of order be given dasti as prayed for.
( AMAR NATH )

NEW DELHI
ARB no. 1109/13

HDFC Bank Ltd. Vs. TRIPURARI MISHRA
31.03.2015
Present:

He wishes to

( AMAR NATH )
No. D-1477/04.
On S.A.
petitioner.
RO&AC
( AMAR NATH )
-2Order
company. Order dated 18.04.2013 for repossessing the vehicle make WAGON R
LXI CNG bearing Registration No. UP16AC9222 by appointing the receiver is
( AMAR NATH )

NEW DELHI
ARB no. 1103/13

HDFC Bank Ltd. Vs. Virender Kumar
31.03.2015
Present:

He wishes to

( AMAR NATH )
No. D-1477/04.
On S.A.
petitioner.
RO&AC
( AMAR NATH )
-2Order
company. Order dated 18.04.2013 for repossessing the vehicle make HYUNDAI
SANTRO XING GLS bearing Registration No. HR26BK8182 by appointing the
receiver is merged with the arbitral award.
Award has been passed in view of
the order dt. 18.04.2013 u/s 9 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996.
Petitioner is at liberty to deal with the vehicle in terms of the award. Nothing
remains to be survived. File be consigned to record room.
Copy of order be
given dasti as prayed for.

( AMAR NATH )

NEW DELHI
ARB no. 1111/13

HDFC Bank Ltd. Vs. Ashima Goyal
31.03.2015
Present:

He wishes to

( AMAR NATH )
No. D-1477/04.
On S.A.
petitioner.
RO&AC
( AMAR NATH )
-2Order
company. Order dated 30.03.2013 for repossessing the vehicle make HYUNDAI
I-10 SPORTZ bearing Registration No. HR29Z5969 by appointing the receiver is
( AMAR NATH )

NEW DELHI
ARB no. 1115/13

HDFC Bank Ltd. Vs. Ajay Kumar
31.03.2015
Present:

He wishes to

( AMAR NATH )
No. D-1477/04.
On S.A.
petitioner.
RO&AC
( AMAR NATH )
-2Order
ZEN ESTILO LXI bearing Registration No. UP14AQ7489 by appointing the
receiver is merged with the arbitral award.
Award has been passed in view of
the order dt. 18.04.2013 u/s 9 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996.
Petitioner is at liberty to deal with the vehicle in terms of the award. Nothing
remains to be survived. File be consigned to record room.
Copy of order be
given dasti as prayed for.

( AMAR NATH )

NEW DELHI
ARB no. 1105/13

HDFC Bank Ltd. Vs. Subhodh Kumar Sharma
31.03.2015
Present:

He wishes to

( AMAR NATH )
No. D-1477/04.
On S.A.
petitioner.
RO&AC
( AMAR NATH )
-2Order
WAGON R VXI bearing Registration No. UP14AV2703 by appointing the receiver
prayed for.
( AMAR NATH )

NEW DELHI
ARB no. 1108/13

HDFC Bank Ltd. Vs. Amit Kumar
31.03.2015
Present:

He wishes to

( AMAR NATH )
No. D-1477/04.
On S.A.
petitioner.
RO&AC
( AMAR NATH )
-2Order
WAGON R LXI bearing Registration No. HR51AJ2363 by appointing the receiver
prayed for.
( AMAR NATH )
IN THE COURT OF SHRI AMAR NATH : DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE:

NEW DELHI
RCT No. 38/14
M/s Ivory Mart Vs. Ankur Kathuria
31.03.2015
Present :
Sh. G.P. Theraja, Sr. Advocate with Sh. Vijay Zaveri, Ld Counsel
for the petitioner.
Sh. Gaurav Seth, Ld. Counsel for the respondent.
By this order, I shall decide the application moved under section 40
of the Delhi Rent Control Act r/w section 151 CPC by M/s Ivory Mart seeking
modification of the order dated 16.02.2015 vide which the appeal bearing no.
38/2014 was disposed of with the modification of paragraph 8 of the impugned
order dated 29.10.2014.
Ld. Counsel for the appellant states that there is no dispute about
the existence of relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties though
the dispute may pertains to some other issue/ground provides under section
14(1)(a) to (j) of the Delhi Rent Control Act. The appellant had never recognized
or accepted the respondent as owner or landlord of the premises nor had ever
paid any rent or attorned to the respondent as such, the relationship of landlord
and tenant between the parties was disputed. He further states that no order
could have been passed under provisions of section 15(2) of the DRC Act, infact
order ought to have been passed under the provisions of section 15(4) of DRC
Act which provides for deposit of rent with the Court only instead of being
deposited with the landlord. This Court disposed of the appeal, however, due to
inadvertence the impugned order sought to be modified was not modified to its
intend and only word tender was substituted with deposit . The aforesaid
discrepancy came to the knowledge of the appellant on 04.03.2015 when he
:: 2 ::
received the copy of the order and as such, the application was immediately
moved. The counsel for the appellant has relied upon the judgment titled as Ajit
Kumar Vs. Surinder Kumar & Sons, 1998 (46) DRJ wherein it has been held as
under:
Section 15(1) & 15(4)- Deposit of arrears of rent- Disputed
ownership- The Rent controller has jurisdiction to direct the
tenant to deposit the amount with it which shall be payable
after the determination of status of the party.
Notice of the application was given to the non applicant/respondent
who did not wish to file any reply, however, opposes the application verbally
submitting that the application is not maintainable in the present form as the
order dated 16.02.2015 does not suffer from any infirmity.
Heard. Ld. Counsel for the appellant states that no order could have
been passed under the provisions of section 15(1) of DRC Act because title
dispute with regard to the tenanted premises is pending adjudication before the
Hon'ble High Court of Delhi. He further states that the Ld. Trial Court ought to
have passed the order under section 15(4) of the Act. During the course of
arguments of the appeal preferred against the impugned order dated 29.10.2014,
Ld. Counsel for the respondent/landlord fairly conceded that the word tender be
substituted with the word deposit . Accordingly, the order dated 16.02.2015
passed. But due to some typographical error in the first line of the modified
paragraph 8, the word tender could not be substituted with the word deposit
and the same requires correction and therefore, I find no reason to decline the
prayer made in the application.
:: 3 ::
In so far the deposit of rent with the petitioner is concerned, I am to
state that the same also suffers infirmity simply for the reason that this is
admitted fact of the parties that the title dispute of the tenanted premises is
pending adjudication in FAO before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi. It can be
well stated that this Court cannot decide, at this stage, as to who has right to
recover rent of the premises in question. The safer course would be that if the
tenant is directed to deposit the rent in the court instead of with the petitioner and
as such, paragraph 8 to that extent also requires modification. Now the modified
paragraph 8 shall be read as under:I hereby order respondent to deposit Rs. 416.50/- as legally
recoverable rent, payable per month, for the time period from
16.05.2011 till 15.02.2014. In addition to that respondent is
further directed to deposit the said rent , consequent to
15.02.2014 till date in the Court and is directed to deposit
future rent by 15th day of each calender month.
After applying the ratio of judgment Ajeet Kumar (Supra), order
dated 16.02.2015 is modified to that extent only and remaining terms and
conditions shall remain the same. This order of modification shall remain as the
part and parcel of the order dated 16.02.2015 vide which the appeal bearing no.
38/15 was disposed of. No order as to costs. Application stands disposed of
accordingly. A copy of this order be sent to the trial Court and thereafter appeal
file be consigned to record room.
( AMAR NATH )

NEW DELHI
CS No. 7/15
Gurmeet Singh Bindra Vs. Sajjivve Trehaan
31.03.2015
Present :
Sh. Sandeep Kumar Dagar, proxy counsel for the petitioner.

Summons sent to the defendant through registered post as well as
by ordinary manner received back as unserved with the respective remarks no

such person by that name and not residing at the given address .
Issue fresh notice to the defendant on taking steps within a week by
filing PF/RC/approved courier, returnable on 19.05.2015.
( AMAR NATH )

NEW DELHI
CS No. 24/15
M/s Phoenix ARC Pvt. Ltd Vs. Surinder Sood
31.03.2015
Present :
Sh. Bali Ram Dwivedi, Ld. Counsel for the plaintiff.

Some more time is sought to make the deficiency of the court fee
good. Let him to do so on or before the next date of hearing.

Put up on 07.04.2015 for compliance.
( AMAR NATH )

NEW DELHI
PPA No. 26/14
Neelam Thakur Vs. Director of Estates
31.03.2015
Present :
Neither the appellant nor her counsel is present.

Be awaited.
( AMAR NATH )
At 12 noon
Present :
As above.
Be awaited.
( AMAR NATH )
At 3 pm
Present :
As before.
Nobody has appeared on behalf of the appellant since morning
despite repeated calls. It is noteworthy that the appellant has been absenting
herself from proceedings since last date of hearing meaning thereby the
appellant has left the interest in the proceedings of this case and hence, the
petition is dismissed in default for want of non-appearance. File be consigned to
the record room. TCR file be sent back with the copy of this order.
( AMAR NATH )

NEW DELHI
ARB No. 721/14
TATA Capital Financial Services Vs. Jai Singh & Anr.
31.03.2015
Present :
Sh. Varun Bedi, Regional Legal Manager/AR on behalf of the

petitioner.
Respondent in person with counsel Sh. Bharat Bhusan.
One last and final opportunity is sought by the respondent to bring
the money in an account for settlement.

Put up on 15.04.2015 for further proceedings.
( AMAR NATH )

NEW DELHI
ARB No. 2518/13, 2338/13, 2155/13 and 2517/13
HDFC Bank Vs.
31.03.2015
Present :
None for the petitioner.

Be awaited.
( AMAR NATH )
At 12 noon
Present :
As above.
Be awaited.
( AMAR NATH )
At 2.30 pm
Present :
As above.
Nobody has appeared on behalf of the petitioner since morning
despite repeated calls. In the interest of justice, the matter stands adjourned to
23.05.2015.
( AMAR NATH )

NEW DELHI
ARB No. 1129/14, 1130/14 & 1142/14
Bussan Auto Finance India Vs.
31.03.2015
Present :
None for the petitioner.

Be awaited.
( AMAR NATH )
At 12 noon
Present :
As above.
Be awaited.
( AMAR NATH )
At 2.30 pm
Present :
Sh. Surender Tyagi, Ld. Counsel for the petitioner.

At request, the matter stands adjourned to 17.04.2015.
( AMAR NATH )

NEW DELHI
ARB.234/15
HDFC Bank Ltd v Mithlesh Kumar
31.3.2015
Present :
Sh.Harsh Sinha, Ld. Counsel for the petitioner.
Ld. Counsel for the petitioner states that the arbitration proceedings have
been initiated against the respondent vide letter dated 27.2.2015 but no award has been
passed as yet.
Notice of this application be issued to the respondent on taking steps
within three days by filing PF/RC returnable on 22.5.2015.
An application U/s 151 CPC seeking interim relief in the nature of
appointment appointment of the receiver Sh.Deepak Negi with the directions to take
possession of vehicle make Maruti Swift Dzire LDI bearing Registration no.DL6CL5257
Chasis no.MA3FSEB1S00437986 Engine No.D13A1765937 from the respondent, his
agents or any other person found to be in possession of the said vehicle. To support his
contention, Ld. Counsel has placed reliance on judgments titled as L&T Finance Ltd.
V/s. Shree Shubh Laxmi & Anr. in OMP No.1176/14 decided on 26.09.2014 and L&T
Finance Ltd. V/s. Sarwan Ram Manda & Ors. in OMP No.22/2015 decided on
06.01.2015.
It is stated that the respondent approached the petitioner with request to
raise a loan for the purpose of purchasing the aforesaid vehicle. An amount of Rs.
405393/- was disbursed in favour of the respondent and the respondent executed LoanCum-Hypothecation-Cum-Guarantee Agreement. Delivery of the said vehicle was given
to him. As per terms and conditions of the loan, the time was the essence of the
agreement and the respondent was bound to repay the said loan amount along with
interest within the time schedule. In case of default, he is bound to pay overdue interest
and other charges.
Respondent has failed to repay the loan amount as per the schedule and
thus guilty of having committed defaults. Respondent did not repay the loan despite
various demands raised from time to time and as such legal notice was served upon the
respondent thereby terminating the facility of loan extended to respondent. A Sum of Rs.
201009/- is still due and outstanding against the respondent.
Heard. Sh. Deepak Negi is hereby appointed as receiver with the
direction to take possession of aforesaid vehicle from the respondent, his agents or any
other person found to be in possession of the said vehicle. He may seek the police aid,
if so requires. Dasti.
To come up on 22.5.2015.
( AMAR NATH )
New Delhi/31.3.2015

NEW DELHI
ARB.243/15
Tata Capital Financial Services Ltd. V Prakash Garg
31.3.2015
Fresh petition filed. It be checked and registered.
Present :
Sh.S.P.Rana, Ld. Counsel for the petitioner.
Ld. Counsel for the petitioner states that the arbitration proceedings have been
initiated against the respondent vide letter dated 26.3.2015 but no award has been
passed as yet.
Notice of this application be issued to the respondent on taking steps within three
days by filing PF/RC returnable on 22.5.2015.
An application U/s 151 CPC seeking interim relief in the nature of appointment
appointment of the receiver Sh.Vikas Bharti with the directions to take possession of
vehicle make SWIFT DZIRE LDI bearing Registration no.UP14CL0406 Engine
No.D13A2436762 Chassis no.MA3FJEB1S00598516 from the respondent, his agents or
any other person found to be in possession of the said vehicle. To support his
contention, Ld. Counsel has placed reliance on judgments titled as L&T Finance Ltd.
V/s. Shree Shubh Laxmi & Anr. in OMP No.1176/14 decided on 26.09.2014 and L&T
Finance Ltd. V/s. Sarwan Ram Manda & Ors. in OMP No.22/2015 decided on
06.01.2015.
It is stated that the respondent approached the petitioner with request to raise a
loan for the purpose of purchasing the aforesaid vehicle. An amount of Rs.554000/- was
disbursed in favour of the respondent and the respondent executed Loan-CumHypothecation-Cum-Guarantee Agreement. Delivery of the said vehicle was given to
him. As per terms and conditions of the loan, the time was the essence of the
and other charges.
Respondent has failed to repay the loan amount as per the schedule and thus
guilty of having committed defaults. Respondent did not repay the loan despite various
demands raised from time to time and as such legal notice was served upon the
79729.79/- is still due and outstanding against the respondent.
Heard. Sh. Vikas Bharti is hereby appointed as receiver with the direction to take
possession of aforesaid vehicle from the respondent, his agents or any other person
found to be in possession of the said vehicle. He may seek the police aid, if so requires.
Dasti.
( AMAR NATH )

NEW DELHI
ARB.235/15
Tata Capital Financial Services Ltd. V Amarjit Singh
31.3.2015
Present :
Sh.S.P.Rana, Ld. Counsel for the petitioner.
Ld. Counsel for the petitioner states that the arbitration proceedings have been
initiated against the respondent vide letter dated 16.3.2015 but no award has been
passed as yet.
Notice of this application be issued to the respondent on taking steps within three
days by filing PF/RC returnable on 22.5.2015.
An application U/s 151 CPC seeking interim relief in the nature of appointment
appointment of the receiver Sh.Vikas Bharti with the directions to take possession of
vehicle make NISSAN EV ALIA bearing Registration no.DL12C7769 Engine No.E001758
from the respondent, his agents or any other person found to be in possession of the
said vehicle. To support his contention, Ld. Counsel has placed reliance on judgments
titled as L&T Finance Ltd. V/s. Shree Shubh Laxmi & Anr. in OMP No.1176/14 decided
on 26.09.2014 and L&T Finance Ltd. V/s. Sarwan Ram Manda & Ors. in OMP No.
22/2015 decided on 06.01.2015.
It is stated that the respondent approached the petitioner with request to raise a
loan for the purpose of purchasing the aforesaid vehicle. An amount of Rs.770000/- was
disbursed in favour of the respondent and the respondent executed Loan-CumHypothecation-Cum-Guarantee Agreement. Delivery of the said vehicle was given to
him. As per terms and conditions of the loan, the time was the essence of the
and other charges.
Respondent has failed to repay the loan amount as per the schedule and thus
guilty of having committed defaults. Respondent did not repay the loan despite various
demands raised from time to time and as such legal notice was served upon the
463860/- is still due and outstanding against the respondent.
Heard. Sh. Vikas Bharti is hereby appointed as receiver with the direction to take
possession of aforesaid vehicle from the respondent, his agents or any other person
found to be in possession of the said vehicle. He may seek the police aid, if so requires.
Dasti.
( AMAR NATH )

NEW DELHI
ARB.236/15,237/15,238/15,239/15,240/15,241/15,242/15
31.3.2015
Present :
Sh.S.K.Sharma counsel for petitioner.

He seeks time to advance arguments.
To come up for consideration on 6.4.2015.
( AMAR NATH )

NEW DELHI
ARB.233/15
Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. Vs Hasir Mohammad
31.3.2015
Present :
Sh.Ajeet Singh counsel for petitioner.

He seeks time to advance arguments.
To come up for consideration on 1.4.2015.
( AMAR NATH )

NEW DELHI
TP(crl.) 87/14
Asha Sharma v Rajpal Sharma & Anr.
31.3.2015
Present :
Sh.D.B.Ray counsel for the petitioner.

Dr.Vimal Verma counsel for respondent.
Comments of the Ld.Judge has not been received as yet. Let the
comments be called. Necessary letter be written accordingly.

Put up on 17.4.2015.
( AMAR NATH )

NEW DELHI
ARCT 20/13
Mrs.Kiran Seoine & Ors vs Raj Kumar Sharma & Ors
31.3.2015
Present :
Sh.Amit Sethi counsel for appellant. POA filed.

Respondent no.1 in person.
Sh.N.C.Gupta counsel for respondent no.2.
Arguments heard in part.
Put up for further arguments on 30.5.2015.
( AMAR NATH )

NEW DELHI
ARCT 10/14
Sheela Devi vs Subhey Singh @ Sube Singh
31.3.2015
Present :
None for appellant.

Respondent in person.
Be awaited.
( AMAR NATH )
At 12pm
31.3.2015
Present :
As before.
Be awaited.
( AMAR NATH )
At 1pm
31.3.2015
Present :
Sh.Nafe Singh proxy counsel for Sh.Q.H.Khan counsel for

appellant.
Sh.Rajkumar Chandiwal counsel for respondent.
One last and final opportunity sought to advance argument.
To come up on 27.5.2015 for arguments.
( AMAR NATH )

NEW DELHI
MCD Appl.3/14
LGF Occupants Association vs NDMC
31.3.2015
Present :
Sh.Sh.Vishwender Verma counsel for appellant.

Sh.Ikrant Sharma counsel for NDMC.
Arguments concluded on behalf of appellant.
Arguments advanced in part on behalf of NDMC.
Counsel for NDMC seeks time to make further submission.
To come up for argument on 21.5.2015.
( AMAR NATH )

DO Retrieved - Asp

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

DO Retrieved - Asp

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

IN THE COURT OF SH.

AMAR NATH: DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE:

ARB no. 1106/13

Shri Harsh Sinha, Ld. Counsel for the petitioner.

agreement no. 13545231 dated 21.08.2008 has been passed.

make the statement. Let his statement be recorded.

I state that the petitioner does not wish to

Award has been passed in view of the order

Copy of order be given dasti as

IN THE COURT OF SH. AMAR NATH: DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE:

ARB no. 1104/13

Shri Harsh Sinha, Ld. Counsel for the petitioner.

agreement no. 19360066 dated 04.10.2011 has been passed.

make the statement. Let his statement be recorded.

I state that the petitioner does not wish to

Award has been passed in view of the order

Copy of order be given dasti as

IN THE COURT OF SH. AMAR NATH: DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE:

ARB no. 1112/13

Shri Harsh Sinha, Ld. Counsel for the petitioner.

agreement no. 12797279 dated 16.02.2008 has been passed.

make the statement. Let his statement be recorded.

I state that the petitioner does not wish to

IN THE COURT OF SH. AMAR NATH: DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE:

ARB no. 1109/13

Shri Harsh Sinha, Ld. Counsel for the petitioner.

agreement no. 18187401 dated 26.02.2011 has been passed.

make the statement. Let his statement be recorded.

I state that the petitioner does not wish to

IN THE COURT OF SH. AMAR NATH: DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE:

ARB no. 1103/13

Shri Harsh Sinha, Ld. Counsel for the petitioner.

agreement no. 18710236 dated 05.05.2011 has been passed.

make the statement. Let his statement be recorded.

I state that the petitioner does not wish to

Award has been passed in view of

given dasti as prayed for.

IN THE COURT OF SH. AMAR NATH: DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE:

ARB no. 1111/13

Shri Harsh Sinha, Ld. Counsel for the petitioner.

agreement no. 18230180 dated 21.02.2011 has been passed.

make the statement. Let his statement be recorded.

I state that the petitioner does not wish to

IN THE COURT OF SH. AMAR NATH: DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE:

ARB no. 1115/13

Shri Harsh Sinha, Ld. Counsel for the petitioner.

agreement no. 13381024 dated 27.06.2008 has been passed.

make the statement. Let his statement be recorded.

I state that the petitioner does not wish to

Award has been passed in view of

given dasti as prayed for.

IN THE COURT OF SH. AMAR NATH: DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE:

ARB no. 1105/13

Shri Harsh Sinha, Ld. Counsel for the petitioner.

agreement no. 14610212 dated 16.03.2009 has been passed.

make the statement. Let his statement be recorded.

I state that the petitioner does not wish to

Award has been passed in view of the order

Copy of order be given dasti as

IN THE COURT OF SH. AMAR NATH: DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE:

ARB no. 1108/13

Shri Harsh Sinha, Ld. Counsel for the petitioner.

agreement no. 16085831 dated 25.01.2010 has been passed.