VINOD KUMAR Vs. STATE NCT OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application for anticipatory bail. Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that there is a civil dispute and has made reference to the order dated 16th June, 2010 passed by the vacation Judge granting stay. He has relied upon judgments of this Court in A.K. Arora v. State, 2006 (131) DLT 24, Monika Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi), 2006 (133) DLT 206 and K. Jayram v. State, 2006 (134) DLT 390.

(2.) I have examined the allegations made in the FIR. As per the FIR, the complainant -Om Arora had entered into an agreement to sell with Anmol Aggarwal and J.P. Aggarwal on 2nd September, 2009 for purchase of ground floor and covered parking measuring 178.19 square meters and basement No. B -1 having covered area of 147.05 square meters in M -3, AVG Bhawan, Connaught Place, New Delhi. At the time of signing of agreement to sell, (Editor: The text of the vernacular matter has not been reproduced. Please write to contact@ if the vernacular matter is required.) 25,00,000/ - each was paid to the sellers (total (Editor: The text of the vernacular matter has not been reproduced. Please write to contact@ if the vernacular matter is required.) 50,00,000/ -) as a part payment. The seller approached the complainant to make payment of (Editor: The text of the vernacular matter has not been reproduced. Please write to contact@ if the vernacular matter is required.) 36,50,000/ - to NDMC to clear the arrears towards house tax. It is alleged that these arrears were paid on 31st March, 2010. It is alleged in the FIR that sale deed was executed in favour of the complainant on 13th May, 2010. At the time of the execution of the sale deed payment of (Editor: The text of the vernacular matter has not been reproduced. Please write to contact@ if the vernacular matter is required.) 53,50,000/ - was made. Thus total sale consideration of (Editor: The text of the vernacular matter has not been reproduced. Please write to contact@ if the vernacular matter is required.) 1.40 Crore was paid by the complainant to the sellers. As per the FIR, the sellers had signed the payment receipts and gave possession letter to the complainant.

(3.) THE applicant, Vinod Kumar, claims that he was inducted as a tenant by the sellers on 400 square feet of the area on the ground floor on 1st February, 2010 on a monthly rent of (Editor: The text of the vernacular matter has not been reproduced. Please write to contact@ if the vernacular matter is required.) 3,000/ - and on payment of security deposit of (Editor: The text of the vernacular matter has not been reproduced. Please write to contact@ if the vernacular matter is required.) 10,000/ - by the sellers.