Full Text
Translation output
28 . y
#
% 21.12.2010
Present: Mr. Pawan Kumar and Mr. Ravi Bassi, Advs. for the petitioners.
Mr. Prashany Mendiratta and Mr. Rahul Mittal, Advs. the respondent.
+ Crl. M.C. 3946/2010 & Crl. M.A. 18784/2010 fStav)
*
Respondent had filed a complaint under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the petitioners praying therein that petitioners be summoned, tried and punished for the offence under
Sections 406/420/468/471/506/120-B IPC.
After recording pre-summoning evidence, learned Additional
Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, vide order dated 28^^ June, 2010 has summoned the petitioners for the offences under Sections
420/468/471 IPC read with Section 120-B IPC.
The disputes between the parties, which led to filing of the complaint case revolve around the booking of a commercial unit by the respondent in a commercial complex which petitioners proposed to construct.
Now, both the parties have settled their disputes amicably.
Terms of settlement have been recorded in a Memorandum of
Understanding dated 17^^ December, 2010. In terms of the
2010:DHC:10471
-y w settlement, petitioners have already refunded the booking amoun^^ along with some additional cost, to the respondent.
Both the parties shall remain bound by the terms of the settlement.
In view of the settlement, learned counsel for the respondent, on instructions, submits that he has no objection in case the complaint case is quashed.
In view of the above facts, in the larger interest, complaint case
No. 05/09 titled IMS Mercantile Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Vigneshwara Developers
Pvt. Ltd. 8& Ors. pending before Trial Court is quashed.
Petition as well as application is disposed of in the above terms.
Copy of the order be given to both the parties, under the signatures of the Court Master. i.K. PATHAK, J.
DECEMBER 21, 2010 ga
2010:DHC:10471
#
% 21.12.2010
Present: Mr. Pawan Kumar and Mr. Ravi Bassi, Advs. for the petitioners.
Mr. Prashany Mendiratta and Mr. Rahul Mittal, Advs. the respondent.
+ Crl. M.C. 3946/2010 & Crl. M.A. 18784/2010 fStav)
*
Respondent had filed a complaint under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the petitioners praying therein that petitioners be summoned, tried and punished for the offence under
Sections 406/420/468/471/506/120-B IPC.
After recording pre-summoning evidence, learned Additional
Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, vide order dated 28^^ June, 2010 has summoned the petitioners for the offences under Sections
420/468/471 IPC read with Section 120-B IPC.
The disputes between the parties, which led to filing of the complaint case revolve around the booking of a commercial unit by the respondent in a commercial complex which petitioners proposed to construct.
Now, both the parties have settled their disputes amicably.
Terms of settlement have been recorded in a Memorandum of
Understanding dated 17^^ December, 2010. In terms of the
2010:DHC:10471
-y w settlement, petitioners have already refunded the booking amoun^^ along with some additional cost, to the respondent.
Both the parties shall remain bound by the terms of the settlement.
In view of the settlement, learned counsel for the respondent, on instructions, submits that he has no objection in case the complaint case is quashed.
In view of the above facts, in the larger interest, complaint case
No. 05/09 titled IMS Mercantile Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Vigneshwara Developers
Pvt. Ltd. 8& Ors. pending before Trial Court is quashed.
Petition as well as application is disposed of in the above terms.
Copy of the order be given to both the parties, under the signatures of the Court Master. i.K. PATHAK, J.
DECEMBER 21, 2010 ga
2010:DHC:10471
JUDGMENT