https://www.facebook.com/102939541675859/

Rationale Ratio Law Offices

Home
India
Delhi
Rationale Ratio Law Offices

At Rationale Ratio, we are steadfast in our commitment to provide affordable & quality legal service

31/05/2026

Rationale Ratio Law Offices successfully represented the Plaintiff before the Hon’ble Commercial Court, Rohini Courts, Delhi, where the application filed under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (“CPC”) has been dismissed vide Order dated 22.05.2026.

The Hon’ble Court while accepting the submissions of the arguing counsels for the Plaintiff reiterated the settled position of law that while considering an application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC, the averments contained in the plaint are required to be examined and that disputed questions are matters for trial.

The matter was argued by Mr. Parvesh Bansal and Mr. Rahul Bansal, Advocates.

28/05/2026

A significant relief granted by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in Regular First Appeal whereby the operation of the Judgment and Decree dated 26.09.2025 has been stayed.

The matter was effectively represented on behalf of the Appellant by Mr. Parvesh Bansal and Mr. Rahul Bansal, Advocates, showcasing strategic appellate advocacy and timely legal intervention.

At every stage, the right legal approach can make all the difference.

05/05/2026

Swift Resolution. Strategic Approach. Meaningful Outcomes.

A cheque dishonour matter under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was successfully resolved within just 2.5 months from the date of filing — not through prolonged litigation, but through effective Mediation and Settlement at the Delhi Mediation Centre.

At Rationale Ratio Law Offices, we believe that the true objective of litigation especially in business disputes is not merely to “win” a case, but to achieve a logical, efficient, and commercially sensible resolution.

By leveraging Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanisms, we help parties arrive at outcomes that are mutually beneficial, time-efficient and cost-effective.

03/05/2026

A recent order secured by Rationale Ratio Law Offices, led by Mr. Parvesh Bansal and Mr. Rahul Bansal, reinforces a crucial principal that Litigation is not a tool for delay — it is a process governed by discipline, diligence, and respect for court timelines. If you are involved in legal proceedings, ensure timely compliance and proactive representation.

Courts today are taking a firm stance against such conduct. Repeated non-appearance, failure to comply with court directions or seeking unnecessary adjournments can lead to closure of rights, imposition of costs, dismissal of applications and adverse judicial orders.

A recent order reinforces this position, where despite multiple opportunities, continued delays resulted in dismissal of the application by the Hon’ble Court.

01/05/2026

Another strong result delivered by Rationale Ratio Law Offices. The Hon’ble Court of District Judge, while issuing Notice in Application under Order IX Rule 13 CPC, has granted stay on ex*****on proceedings arising out of the impugned judgment and decree dated 19.07.2024, safeguarding our client’s rights.

21/04/2026

We are pleased to share a significant order wherein Regular Bail has been granted by Hon’ble Sessions Court to Applicant who was arrayed as one of the accused in FIR registered for offences under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The Hon’ble Court reaffirmed settled principles of criminal jurisprudence particularly - Bail is the rule, Jail is the exception and personal liberty cannot be curtailed unless absolutely necessary.

The order reflects constitutional balance between investigation and individual liberty. Applicant was successfully represented by Mr. Parvesh Bansal and Mr. Rahul Bansal, Advocates.

20/04/2026

A notable outcome in Commercial Suit titled as Panasonic Life Solutions Pvt. Ltd. v. Dinesh Kumar and Ors.

Mr. Parvesh Bansal and Mr. Rahul Bansal appeared on behalf of proposed defendant, who had been erroneously sought to be impleaded as a proposed defendant in proceedings alleging sale of pirated goods.

Through detailed submissions, it was demonstrated that the Plaintiff had incorrectly linked personal mobile number of our client to the alleged proposed defendant without any cogent material, despite the Local Commissioner’s report containing no such identification. The reply further clarified that our client had no connection whatsoever with the alleged infringing activities, premises, or proposed defendant.

Upon hearing, the Hon’ble Court sought clarification from the Plaintiff regarding the identity/details of the proposed defendant. As the Plaintiff was unable to furnish the necessary clarification, the Plaintiff withdrew the impleadment application under Order I Rule 10(2) CPC, which was accordingly dismissed as withdrawn.

An important reminder that allegations of infringement and impleadment of parties must rest on verified particulars and substantive material—not assumptions or erroneous linkage of personal details.

Address

Delhi

Website

facebook.com

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when Rationale Ratio Law Offices posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Want your business to be the top-listed Law Practice in Delhi?