CG Civil Judge Mains 2016 Question Paper

Page 1 as text

Chhattisgarh Judicial Service Mains Examination 2016

CHHATTISGARH JUDICIAL SERVICE

2016 Mains Examination

Time: 3 hrs

Max. Marks: 100

1. Read the following carefully and write judgement after framing necessary issues:

[40]

One trader, Alok Jain gave a loan of Rs. 20,000/- to Sohanlal Gupta on 1.1.2012 at Raipur. In return,

Sohanlal Gupta executed a promissory note. Alok Jain is residing in Raipur and Sohanlal Gupta is

residing in Bilaspur. When Alok Jain demanded the money by writing a letter on 1.10.2014,

Sohanlal Gupta gave a reply assuring Alok Jain that the amount in question will be paid by him

within a period of two years as presently he is having financial difficulties. Subsequently, Alok Jain

filed a suit on 1.1.2016 for recovering the amount in the Civil Court at Raipur. Sohanlal Gupta took

the plea that the Raipur Court has no territorial jurisdiction to decide the suit. Sohanlal Gupta filed

his written statement raising the point that the suit is filed after a period of three years from the date

of transaction and, therefore, it is time-barred. A plea was also taken in the written statement that he

had not received any amount and also he had not signed the promissory note.

2. Read the following carefully and write judgement after framing necessary charges.

The prosecution case is that on 11.6.2010 Shri Rajendra Patel, the father of student named Ashok

Patel submitted his son’s marksheet to use it for securing admission in the Medical College. The

total marks shown in the marksheet were more than that which the student would have got even if

he had secured cent-percent marks, which raised the suspicion of the Admission Scrutiny

Committee, headed by Dr. D.S. Tomar. Moreover, the said marksheet purported to have been issued

after revaluation, bore the same date and seal as that of the original marksheet. Dr. D.S. Tomar,

therefore, lodged FIR against Shri Rajendra Patel in Shankar Nagar, Police Station, Raipur. During

investigation, necessary seizure was done. After completion of investigation, the police filed

chargesheet against Shri Rajendra Patel. Defence Counsel raised the plea that the accused had not

himself forged the marksheet and that he did not know that the marksheet was a forged one. It was

also pleaded on his behalf that the alleged forgery had not actually been acted upon, therefore he

cannot be held guilty of this offence.

3. Translate the following Hindi passage into English. [10]