REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

Tara Gulechha Appellant

V/S

Idea Housing Corporation Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

CHAJOO RAM VS RADHEY SHYAM CASE [REFERRED TO]
VIRINDAR KUMAR SATYAWADI VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [REFERRED TO]
LALJI HARIDAS VS. STETE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF KARNATAKA VS. HEMAREDDY ALIAS VEMAREDDY [REFERRED TO]
BALIRAM WAMAN HIRAY VS. JUSTICE B LENTIN [REFERRED TO]
K T M S MOHD AMANULLAH QUARESHI VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
M S AHLAWAT VS. STATE OF HARYANA [REFERRED TO]
MANOHAR LAL VS. VINESH ANAND [REFERRED TO]
IQBAL SINGH MARWAH VS. MEENAKSHI MARWAH [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF RAJASTHAN VS. DARSHAN SINGH ALIAS DARSHAN LAL [REFERRED TO]
KOPPALA VENKATASWAMI VS. SATRASALA LAKSHMINARAYANA CHETTI [REFERRED TO]
KISHOREBHAI GANDUBHAI PETHANI VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [REFERRED TO]
V. BABY VS. SEKAR [REFERRED TO]
KAILASH MANGAL VS. RAMESH CHAND [REFERRED TO]
T.DHINAKARAN VS. V.RANGANATHAN [REFERRED TO]
NARENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA VS. STATE OF BIHAR & ORS [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners, who are accused in C.C.No.831 of 2021 for offences under Ss. 120-B and 193 I.P.C., have filed the Quash Petitions.

(2.) The gist of the case is that the petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.11729 of 2021/second accused and four others are owners of the property measuring a total extent of 44,381 sq.ft. situated in Survey Nos.714/4, 714/5, 714/6 and 714/7, at Seshadripuram, 1st Main Road, Ambedkar Nagar, Velachery. Chennai. They appointed the petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.11842 of 2021/A1, who is the husband of the petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.11729 of 2021/A2, and one Jaikumar, son of the representative of the respondent Corporation as Power Agents inter alia to develop the property by a registered Power of Attorney, dtd. 19/6/2014. In the meanwhile, one M/s.Anmol Housing Corporation, who owned the adjacent land, represented by the first accused, developed the property, partly sold few flats in the said property. They could not make further constructions, sell the remaining undivided share in the land. Thus, they had left with undivided share of 31163 sq.ft. to be developed.

(3.) For the sake of convenience and brevity, the parties are referred to as in the complaint.

Click here to view full judgment.

TARA GULECHHA Vs. IDEA HOUSING CORPORATION

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address