ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Before submitting my detailed report/diary on internship, I find an opportunity to place on

record my warm gratitude towards authority of law department Bahra University and our
respected teachers to encourage us towards Internship and how to perform our duty under
Internship. I would like to place my warm gratitude towards Kushal Chanta(Adv.) Distt.Court
Solan under whom, I completed my internship and I gained a detailed and useful experience for
the purpose of Internship as well as for profession of advocacy in near future. I am thankful to
him for his invaluable teachings and advice given to me, for helping me in exploring and
understanding the legal drafting preparation for cases and research methodology better.

Pallavi Kandari

Student of BA.LLB 10th semester

BU2015UGBA.LLB020

Dated: 10/02/2020
 Index
Introduction

Purpose of Internship

Solan District Court

S.no List Of Cases Page No.

1. Almi Devi V/s Sh Bal Krishan 7

2. Smt.Kanta Thakur, Arush Thakur V/S Sh.Sher 8

Singh

3. M/s Thakur Express Services V/S M/s Roseate 9

Medicare

4. State of H.P V/S Gopal 10

5. Sh. Durga Singh V/S Sh. Raju Kumar 11

6. Sh. Durga Singh V/S Pawan Kumar 12

7. Sh. Som Dutt V/S Sh. Surender Kumar 13

8. Sh. Som Dutt V/S Smt. Jyotika Kamal 14

9. Roshan Lal V/S Mr. Kamal Gill 15

2|P ag e
INTRODUCTION

Internship fulfills an important component of both academic and practical education in law. The
integration of professional experience into the learning process is highly effective in developing
your understanding of the law in actions, as you are able to observe and perceive the relevance
and application of theory to practice. Consequently, the program is not simply ‘work
experience’ but a significant educational experience.

In a workspace setting you will be exposed to the reality of the practice of law in all its
dimensions – the integration of different areas of law, policy issues; the application and
development of skills to analysis and resolution of client concerns; ethical responses to
situations which arises unexpectedly and spontaneously; issues of professional responsibility
including responsibility to clients and case management; and the operation of the government
and court system in the legal process.

In a workspace setting we will be exposed to the reality of the practice of law in all its
dimensions – the integration of different areas of law, policy issues; the application and
development of skills to analysis and resolution of client concerns; ethical responses to
situations which arises unexpectedly and spontaneously; issues of professional responsibility
including responsibility to clients and case management; and the operation of the government
and court system in the legal process.

The classroom study and practical training in the field of law is considered as two sides of coin.
The legal profession is one of the professions which are considered incomplete without the
practical training. An additional benefit of the internship program is that it provides an
opportunity to observe the way in which law operates in a practical milieu, and so may assist
you in making future career choices.

3|P ag e
Purpose of Internship

 Expose you to the law in operation in contexts where you will come to perceive aspects
of law which cannot be learned from reading or hearing about it
 to perceive ways in which the formal learning you acquire at University may be applied
in practice and thereof to develop an appreciation of the practical dimensions of legal
principals;
 Enable to relate the different areas of legal practice to the importance of developing the
skills of legal research, communication, drafting, practice management and problem-
solving.
 Enable to observe and reflect upon the values, ethical standards and conduct of the
legal profession in practice and to develop your own attitudes of professional
responsibility.

4|P ag e
Solan District Court

*In the court of District and session judge: Bhupesh Sharma.

* In the court of Additional District and session judge 1st : Parveen Chauhan.

* In the court of Additional District and session judge 2nd : Vivek Sharma.

* In the court of Civil Judge Senior Division / Chief Judicial Magistrate : Rageah Chauhan.

* In the court of civil judge CUM Judicial Magistrate 1st

: Rahul .

*In the court of Civil Judge CUM Judicial Magistrate 2nd

: Shweta Narula.

*In the court of Mobile Traffic Magistrate

: Gaurav Kumar.

5|P ag e
 INTERNSHIP REPORT
(1st JANURARY TO 15th JANURARY – 2020)
Daily internship duties:

1. I was assigned to read minimum of 1 case file to learn how the files and records are
maintained.
2. I was assigned to observe the proceedings during the examination in-chief, cross
examination and final arguments.
3. Supporting the lawyers that come into the office. Attending meetings and appointments
and listening the details of the client.
4. Office type organizational work- photocopying, organizing papers, keeping files in order
and organizing the desk.
5. Reading any law suggested materials for my own benefit.
6. Helping the clients if I am able to since I don’t know much about the field yet.
7. Research on judgments that are related to facts of case.

6|P ag e
Entry No.1

Dated: 1/1/2020

On the very first day of my internship I was not assigned with any task. I was supposed to get familiar
with the office environment and interact with people who were there at office on the same day. I met
many of the clients who were there to meet my guide for counseling of their cases. I observed interview
and counseling of 2 clients on 2 different cases namely Smt.Kanta Thakur, Arush Thakur V/S Sh.Sher
Singh and Pubby Singh V/s Anita Singh.

ENTRY NO.2

[7]Dated: 2/1/2020

IN THE COURT OF Ld. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE SOLAN, DISTRICT SOLAN ,

HIMACHAL PRADESH
Civil Suit No.____/1 of 2018

Smt. Alm Devi D/o Sh Khanki Ram , W/o late Dhani Ram , aged about 76 years ,r/o Vill. Top-ki-Ber
,Tehsil &Distt. Splan(H.P.)

(Mob. No. 86278-14604) ......Plaintiff

Versus

Bal Krishan S/o Sh Rania, r/o Vill. Top-ki-Ber , Tehsil & Distt. Solan(H.P.)

.......Defendent

SECTIONS INVOLVED:
Suit under section 38 and 39 of Specific Relief Act, 1963 .

OBERSERVATION: I learned about the injunction such as Temporary, permanent and mandatory
injunction as has been specified as per in the provision of Civil Procedure Code. I also observed
how the cross examination is conducted and how to manipulate with minds of people.
Application under order 39 rule 1 and 2 C.P.C. for interim injunction was drafted on behalf of
the plaintiff, It is, therefore , prayed that the respondent may kindly be restrained from causing any
type of interference , loss , injury, damage effect encroachment on the suit land or any portion thereof
and further not to do any such act which ,may in any manner whatsoever may cause any type of
prejudice to the user , title an possession of the applicant in and over the suit land either himself or
through any other person whomsoever , during the pendency of suit , the applicant shall pray forever.

ORDER/JUDGEMENT: PENDING

NEXT DATE OF HEARING: 24th april 2019

7|P ag e
ENTRY NO.3

Dated: 3/1/2020

IN THE COURT OF L.D. CHEIF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, DISTRICT COURT SOLAN

(H.P).

Smt.Kanta Thakur, Arush Thakur V/S Sh.Sher Singh

SECTIONS INVOLVED:
Section 125 of C.P.C. (Application for the grant of interim maintenance .)

It is, therefore, prayed that the application may kindly be allowed and the respondent may kindly be
directed to pay Rs.10,000/- per month as interim maintenance during the pendency of the main petition
to the applicants along with Rs.15,00O/- as application charges the interest of justice and equity.

OBERSERVATION:

I observed how cases are preceded under sec 125 of C.P.C. And I came to know who can avail
the maintenance under this section and what are the various exceptions under this section .
ORDER/JUDGEMENT: PENDING

NEXT DATE OF HEARING: 9th feb 2020

8|P ag e
ENTRY NO.4

Dated: 4/1/2020

IN THE COURT OF HON’BLE CIVIL JUDGE (SR-DIV.) SOLAN, DISTRICT SOLAN H.P...
Civil Suit No................................

M/s Thakur Express Services, Mamoor Complex , Near Murari Market Solan Teh. & District Solan H.P:,
through Prop. Sh. Rakesh Thakur.

............ Plaintiff

Versus

1. M/s Roseate Medicare, Vill. Anji, P.O Barog Railway Station, Teh. & Dirstrict Solan H.P, through its
Managing Director .

2. Sh. Ajay Sood S/O not known, Vill. Anji, P.O. Barog Railway Station, Teh. & District Solan H.P .

..........Defendants

OBERSERVATION:

Appearing on the behalf of plaintiff.

Suit for recovery of Rs. 37,000/-(i.e Rs. 29,000/- + Rs 8,042/-) along with interest @12% since20-09-2013
to till its realization against the defendants.

JUDGEMENT:
That defendants were duly served through summons and copies of plaint , they would have come across
the aggrieved by the allegations, they would have approached the court contest the suit to bring the
truth before the Court. Since, the defendant has not appeared before the Court, therefore, it appears
that they have nothing to say and they admit every content of the plaint. The plaintiff is certainly
entitled to recover the amount as mentioned in bills Ex.PW1/C to PW1/L.

Since, authorized signatory/ Proprietor of the defendants firm has also signed the bills, therefore,
defendant is bound by it and therefore, the plaintiff firm is entitled to recover a sum of Rs. 37,962/-
along with interest @12%simple interest per annum from date of filing suit till the actual realization of
the entire amount.

The suit of the plaintiff is therefore decreed with cost Liability of defendants are joint and several.
Decree sheet be drawn up accordingly. The file after completion be consigned to the record room.

Announced in the open Court on this 1st day of August,2019.

P.S. (Rajesh Chauhan)

Senior Civil JudgeSolan ,District Solan H.P.

9|P ag e
ENTRY NO.5

Dated: 6/1/2020

IN THE COURT OF VIBHUTI BAHUGUNA, JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE 1ST CLASS,

KANDAGHAT, DIST. SOLAN, HP
......Criminal case
Filing No : 0000246/2015
Police Challan Number : 56/2 of 2014.
Date of Institution : 17.10.2015
Date of decision : 26.10.2018

IN THE MATTER OF:-

State of H.P
Versus
Gopal, S/o Sh. Dhani Ram, S/o Sh. Kotho, P.O. Shamti, Tehsil & District Solan, H.P
Accused Person
For the state : Ms. Charu Gupta, Ld.APP
For the accused :Sh. Anup Verma, Ld .Advocate
SECTIONS INVOLVED:

Police Challan under Sections 279,337 & 338 of IPC in case FIR Number 80/2015 dt. 31.08.2015
P.S Kandaghat Distt. Solan, H.P.
OBERSERVATION:

Judgement:
By the facts and findings of this case it can be concluded that the prosecution has succeeded to prove
its case against the accused. Hence, accused Gopal is convicted for the offences punishable under
sections 279,337 & 338 of IPC. The convict be heard on quantum of sentence. Judgement shall continue.

Announced in the Open Court on this 26th day of October, 2018 in the presence of the parties .

10 | P a g e
ENTRY NO.6

Dated: 7/1/2020

Assigned to go through and study the Section 138 of NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ACT in detail as
from next day we were supposed to study the cases filed under 138 section of the NEGOTIABLE
INSTRUMENT ACT.

ENTRY NO.7

Dated: 9/1/2020

IN THE COURT OF CHEIF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, DISTRICT COURT SOLAN, (H.P).

Sh.Durga Singh S/O Sh. Khanya Ram, aged about 38 years, resident of Ward No.13, Kaleen, Tehsil and
District Solan (H.P.)Contact number 7015156103, Bank Name : State Bank of India, Rajgarh Road Solan,
A/c No. 20172976543.

..........Complainant.

Versus

Sh. Raju Kumar S/O Sh. Moti Lal, R/o Ward No.2, Railway Colony, Railway Station, Tehsil and District
Solan H.P.

........Accused.

SECTIONS INVOLVED:
COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 138 OF NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ACT .

OBERSERVATION:

This case is filed under section 138 of negotiable instrument act 1881 in which complainant
examined cw1 and cross examination was conducted by the learned counsel for accused. Now
case is fixed for remaining complainant witnesses to be cross examined on dated 18th February
2020.

ORDER/JUDGEMENT: PENDING

NEXT DATE OF HERING: 18th feb 2020(Service)

11 | P a g e
ENTRY NO.8

Dated: 10/1/2020

IN THE COURT OF CHEIF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, DISTRICT COURT SOLAN, (H.P).

Sh.Durga Singh S/O Sh. Khanya Ram, aged about 39 years, resident of Ward No.13, Kaleen, Tehsil and
District Solan (H.P.)Contact number 7015156103, Bank Name : State Bank of India, Rajgarh Road Solan,
A/c No. 20172976543.

..........Complainant.

Versus

Sh. Pawan Kumar S/O Sh.Kumbh Dass, R/O VPO Kathasu(62/1), Kiyara, Tehsil Jubbal, District
Shimla(H.P.)-171206 Presently serving as SDO, HPSEBL Solan, Tehsil and District Solan(H.P.)

.............Accused.

SECTIONS INVOLVED:
COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 138 OF NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ACT .

OBERSERVATION:

I observed case under section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act 1881 which basically deals with
the dishonor of cheque for insufficiency etc. of funds in the accounts. Thus the cases on this day
dealt with section 138 of the negotiable Instrument act and in which the complainant prayed that
the accused may kindly be summoned and be punished for committing offence under section 138
of the NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ACT.

ORDER/JUDGEMENT: PENDING

NEXT DATE OF HERING: 17th feb 2020(N.O.A)

12 | P a g e
ENTRY NO.9

Dated: 13/1/2020

IN THE COURT OF LD. CHEIF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, DISTRICT COURT SOLAN,

(H.P).
Sh. Som Dutt S/O late Sh. Bhajju Ram, aged about 40 years,resident of C/O Durga Singh, Ward No.
13,Kaleen,Tehsil andDistrictSolan (H.P.)Contact number 7876071897

........Complainant.

Versus

Sh. Surender Kumar S/O Sh. Partap Singh, resident of 61/1, Block No. 35-1, Village Bhajond, Tehsil
Nohra, District Sirmour(H.P.)

.......Accused.

SECTIONS INVOLVED:
COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 138 OF NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ACT . Nature of proceedings is under
criminal case.

OBERSERVATION:
It was a case filed under section 138 of THE NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ACT. The complainant provides
PRELIMINARY EVIDENCE IN THE SHAPE OF AFFIDAVIT. Complainant prayed that the accused may kindly
be summoned and be punished for committing offence under section 138 of the NEGOTIABLE
INSTRUMENT ACT.It is also prayed that the accused may also kindly be ordered to pay double
of the cheque amount, damages and the cost of litigation, to the complainant in the interest of
justice.
ORDER/JUDGEMENT: PENDING

NEXT DATE OF HERING: 8th April 2020.

13 | P a g e
ENTRY NO.10

Dated: 14/1/2020

IN THE COURT OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, DISTRICT SOLAN, (H.P) .

Sh. Som Dutt S/O late Sh. Bhajju Ram, aged about 40 years,resident of C/O Durga Singh, Ward No.
13,Kaleen,Tehsil andDistrictSolan (H.P.)Contact number 7876071897

........Complainant.

Versus

Smt. Jyotika Kamal W/O Sh. Ashok Kamal S/O Sh. Randeep Singh, R/O Village Khaltu, P.O.
Karganoo, Tehsil Rajgarh, District Sirmour (H.P.) also resident of C/O Gupta Niwas Opposite Sub
Jail Solan, Tehsil and District Solan(H.P.)

.......Accused.

SECTIONS INVOLVED:
COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 138 OF NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ACT .

OBERSERVATION:

I observed case under section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act 1881 which basically deals with
the dishonor of cheque for insufficiency etc. of funds in the accounts. Thus the cases on this day
dealt with section 138 of the negotiable Instrument act and in which the complainant prayed that
the accused may kindly be summoned and be punished for committing offence under section 138
of the NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ACT.

ORDER/JUDGEMENT: PENDING

NEXT DATE OF HERING: 8 april 2020

14 | P a g e
ENTRY NO.11

Dated: 15/1/2020

IN THE COURT OF CHEIF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, DISTRICT COURT SOLAN, (H.P).

Roshan Lal S/o Sh. Ramanand, aged about 29 years, permanent resident of Village and P.O. Jehar, Tehsil
Pachhad, District Sirmour (H.P.) at present C/o Sashi Food Corner, Near Sanskrit College, Dhobighat
Road Solan, Tehsil and District Solan(H.P.) (Contact No.9805701245)

........Complainant.

Versus

Mr. Kamal Gill, S/o Sh.Purshotam Gill, C/o HPSEBL, Near Congress Bhawan, P.O. Saproon, Tehsil and
District Solan (H.P.).

........Accused.

SECTIONS INVOLVED:
COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 138 OF NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ACT .

OBERSERVATION:

I observed case under section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act 1881 which basically deals with
the dishonour of cheque for insuffiency etc. of funds in the accounts. Complainant and accused
are family relatives. In the month of October 2016 accused approached complainant for financial
help of 35000 rupees which complainant arranged and gave to accused on the same day. Accused
promised to pay back in 4 months. After 4 months the accused refused to pay back the amount to
complainant.

ORDER/JUDGEMENT: PENDING

NEXT DATE OF HERING: 12th feb 2020(F.O)

15 | P a g e