LAWS(DLH)-2019-4-147

SHAKUNTALA DEVI & ANR Vs. PRADEEP PALIWAL

Decided On April 26, 2019
SHAKUNTALA DEVI And ANR Appellant
V/S
PRADEEP PALIWAL Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Inspector Nirbhay Kumar from Economic Offences Wing ('EOW'), Delhi Police is present in person with the original record. The parties are permitted to inspect the same. Status report has been submitted by the EOW. The same is taken on record and retained in a sealed cover with the Deputy Registrar (Original). Matter is passed over to enable inspection.

(2.) Inspection of the documents has been given to counsel for the Defendant. He has raised an issue only in respect of the third page of the cancellation deed where the name of the first witness along with the address was appearing at page 24, however, in the original deed produced by the Police only the signatures appeared. Otherwise both the parties agree that the contents of the said documents are identical. The original documents are now returned to the EOW.

(3.) The present suit under Order XXXVII CPC has been filed seeking recovery of a sum of Rs.28,68,12,000/- along with pendente lite and future interest. The background of the suit is that the Plaintiff - Smt. Shakuntala Devi had entered into a Memorandum of Understanding ('MoU') dated 28th February, 2014 under which the Plaintiff had agreed to invest money in the business of granite mining in the lands belonging to Defendant - Shri Pradeep Paliwal. Accordingly, the Plaintiff had agreed to invest a sum of Rs.20 crores in the said business and pursuant to the said MoU being entered into, the Plaintiff had paid to the Defendant a sum of Rs.13.45 crores. The Defendant had an obligation to obtain a mining lease in respect of the said land, though for whatsoever reasons, the same did not fructify. Thereafter, a supplementary MoU was entered into between the parties on 20th September, 2014 under which it is specifically acknowledged that Rs.13.45 crores has been paid by the Plaintiff and a sum of Rs.6.55 crores is yet to be paid. The payments were made through banking channels. The second MoU records that a mining lease has been applied for the said land in Bhilwara, Rajasthan and has been awarded and the mine would be operational within 90 days from the date of obtaining the environmental clearance. It is also represented that the said amount would earn profit of Rs.50 lakhs per month once environmental clearance was granted and accordingly, further Rs.3.15 crores was, in fact, paid by the Plaintiff vide the receipt dated 23rd September, 2014.