VIPIN KR GUPTA Vs. SARVESH MAHAJAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application is disposed of.

(2.) The alleged brief facts, which emerge from the material on record are that, sometime in May 2013, the respondent (complainant before the Trial Court), approached Lotus Floriculture Pvt. Ltd. for purchase of its flat bearing No. 55, 3rd Floor, Sukhdev Vihar, New Delhi. After negotiation, Lotus Floriculture Pvt. Ltd. agreed to sell the above flat for a total consideration of Rs. 2,20,00,000/- and in consequence, the respondent paid a sum of Rs. 20,00,000/- in cash and Rs. 40,00,000/- through RTGS from the account of M/s Get Post Investment and Finance Service Ltd. and thereafter on 17.05.2013 an Agreement to sell and purchase was executed by the petitioner on behalf of Lotus Floriculture Pvt. Ltd.

(3.) Subsequently, the respondent did not come forward to pay the balance amount nor came forward to perform his part of the Agreement to sell dated 17.05.2013 however, the respondent unauthorizedly presented the aforesaid cheque bearing No. 003858 for encashment which got dishonoured and in consequence of which, the respondent firstly sent a legal notice dated 5.09.2014 and thereafter filed a complaint against the petitioner and the other co-accused in the case for the offence committed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 ("NI Act", in short) which got registered and the Trial Court vide order dated 17.11.2014 issued summons to the petitioner, and the other coaccused namely, Lotus Floriculture LLP. and the partners of the Lotus Floriculture LLP. Thereafter, vide order dated 3.10.2016 the names of the accused Nos. 2 & 3 (partners of Lotus Floriculture LLP) were deleted from the array of parties on the statement made by the respondent, that he does not want to prosecute them, leaving the petitioner and accused No. 1-Lotus Floriculture LLP to face the proceedings under Section 138 read with Section 141 of the NI Act.