MANISH PARWANI Vs. NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All these three petitions under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 filed by the petitioners Mr. Manish Parwani & Mr. Shekhar Narasimhan for quashing of three criminal complaint cases under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 bearing complaint case Nos.1439/1/08; 649/1/2009 & 573/2009 pending against them before Mr. Sandeep Yadav, Senior Civil Judge cum Rent Controller, District South, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi are proposed to be decided by this common judgment because the legal issue that arises for consideration in all these petitions is common.

(2.) The facts of the case giving rise to these petitions briefly stated are as follows:- Respondent No. 2 M/s Appreciate Fincap Private Limited of 24 (hereinafter to be referred as the 'complainant company') had filed three complaints under Section 138 read with Section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 against the petitioners Mr. Manish Parwani & Mr. Shekhar Narasimhan, accused No. 1 company M/s HKK Buildwell Private Limited and its two other Directors namely Sanjay Gambhir and Reena Gambhir arrayed as accused Nos. 2 & 3 in the complaints. The case of the complainant company is that two persons namely Mr. Harvinder Singh & Smt. Kuldeep Kaur (both promoters and only shareholders of 5,000 shares each) had incorporated a company named and styled as M/s HKK Buildwell Private Limited (hereinafter to be referred as 'accused No. 1 company'). The said company had purchased eight acres and three marlas of land in Sonepat for a sale consideration of approximately Rs.6.85 crores. In pursuance thereof, accused No.1 company had borrowed a sum of Rs.7,43,57,000/- from various persons including the complainant company. As per the case of the complainant company, out of the said amount of Rs.7,43,57,000/- borrowed by accused No. 1 company, a sum of Rs.2,26,85,000/- was borrowed by the said company from the complainant company. After borrowing the said amount of money, accused No. 1 company had completed the sale transaction of the aforestated land and executed a sale deed for the said land on 11.10.2006. It is further the complainant company's case that in the year 2007, the aforesaid shareholders of accused No. 1 company (i.e. Mr. Harvinder Singh & Smt. Kuldeep Kaur) entered into an agreement with one company M/s D.D. Townships Limited and by virtue of the said agreement, the entire shareholdings of accused No. 1 company was brought over by the said M/s D.D. Townships Limited. In terms of the said arrangement between the said shareholders of accused No. 1 company and M/s D.D. Townships Limited, the accused Nos. 2 & 3 namely Sanjay Gambhir and Reena Gambhir were appointed as Directors of accused No. 1 company on 20.04.2007. In further terms of the aforesaid arrangement, Mr. Harvinder Singh & Smt. Kuldeep Kaur had resigned from the directorship of accused No. 1 company w.e.f. 26.04.2007.

(3.) It is the case of the complainant company that the entire shareholdings of accused No. 1 company vested in M/s D.D. Townships Limited on the basis of an agreement as mentioned hereinabove. The petitioners being accused Nos. 4 & 5 had become Directors of accused No. 1 company w.e.f. 20.06.2007.