BINAL SEVANTILAL KORADIA Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule in all the Criminal Writ Petitions. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard with the consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties.

(2.) Since Criminal Writ Petition Nos.311 of 2020 and 337 of 2020 arise from the same FIR being No.1018 of 2019 registered on the complainant made by the Respondent No.3 and, the subject matter of the remaining Writ Petitions being Nos.1346/2021, 1348/2021, 1349/2021, 1350/2021, 1351/2021 and 1352/2021 is the letter dtd. 19/08/2020 issued by Respondent No.2 EOW during the course of investigation of the said FIR No.1018 of 2019 for freezing the bank accounts of the Petitioners in the said remaining Petitions, all the Writ Petitions are being disposed of by this common judgment.

(3.) The case of the complainant - Respondent No.3 Rajesh Jugraj Madhani is that, the Petitioners in Writ Petition No.311 of 2020 are the partners of one M/s. Aditya Developers, which is a partnership firm registered under the Indian Partnership Act as also the owner of contiguous lands situated at Manickpur and Berampur at Vasai. The Petitioner in Writ Petition No.337 of 2020 is a practicing Architect and is registered with Vasai-Virar Municipal Corporation as Licensed Engineer. Respondent No.3 herein Rajesh Jugraj Madhani is one of the Directors of Montana Developers Private Limited which is a company incorporated under the provisions of Companies Act and the Developers who had undertaking development of the lands owned by M/s. Aditya Developers at Vasai. Being the owner, the said M/s. Aditya Developers through its partners i.e. the Petitioners in Writ Petition No.311 of 2020, had entered into a joint venture agreement dtd. 30/12/2010 with Montana Developers Private Limited, who was the Developers. The said joint venture was in the name of "Aditya Mighty JV" for development of contiguous lands situate at Manickpur and Berampur at Vasai which is in ownership of said firm of the Petitioners M/s. Aditya Developers. The Petitioners in Writ Petition No.311 of 2020, being the partners, are looking after the day to day management of the said firm Aditya Developers. It is the allegation of the Respondent No.3 that prior to entering into the said joint venture agreement, the Petitioners in Writ Petition No.311 of 2020 visited his office, and during the said visits they made various representations with fraudulent and dishonest intention to induce Respondent No.3 to enter into the said joint venture with their firm Aditya Developers. It is also alleged that the Petitioners visited the office of Respondent No.3 on several occasions prior to entering into a joint venture agreement with a view to persuade him to enter into the said joint venture agreement and with a view to persuade him to part with huge amount in favour of the said firm of the Petitioners Aditya Developers. Pursuant to the said joint ventrue it was mutual agreement to develop the said property and the additional propertyon the terms and conditions mentioned therein. The representations made by the Petitioners were incorporated in the said joint venture agreement in which one of the representations is that, M/s. Aditya Developer is the absolute owner of the said property and the title of the owner to the said property is marketable and if, any claim is made on the said property, it will be be liability of the owner to clear the same. In terms of the joint venture agreement, owner has to obtain clearances for development of infrastructure, to get the plans approved in respect of proposed development, to obtain all sanctions and permission for development under Development Control Regulations, to obtain necessary commencement certificate from Vasai Virar Municipal Corporation and comply with all the obligations/reservations as may be specified under the Development Plans. Pursuant to the said joint venture agreement, the owner and the Developer shall be in joint possession of the said property. The Petitioners executed power of attorney in favour of Respondent No.3 to carry out and complete the proposed development/construction on the said property. In the said joint venture agreement, the owner declares that there are no litigations in respect of the said property and there is no need to investigate their title to the said property. It is also represented to Respondent No.3 that the additional property will be brought in by the said M/s. Aditya Developer and same shall be made available to the joint venture for development on or before 31/12/2011. It is also represented that the original title deeds in respect of the said property shall be deposited in escrow with M/s. Kantilal Unadkat and Co., Advocates and Solicitors for safe keeping. In the said joint venture it is also represented on behalf of owner M/s. Aditya Developer that the title of Survey No.85 and 86 of village Barampur (being a part of the said property) is also marketable and the said property is not affected by CRZ Notification. According to Respondent No.3, Petitioner - Vipul Adhia was present during the visits of the Petitioners in office of Respondent No.3 and he was knowing all the facts relating the said property and additional property.