(1.) ALL these three petitions have been filed by the accused in C. R. No. 44 of 1995 in respect of which Criminal Case No. 69/p of 2000 and Case No. 429 of 1994 of Thane, which have been merged in the aforesaid Case No. 69/p of 2000, pending before the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 19th Court, Esplanade, Bombay, for quashing of the prosecution.
(2.) PYARELAL Ramkishore Prajapati is the main accused and was the only accused when complaint was filed on behalf of M/s. Arcade (I) Pvt. Ltd. by one M. G. Ramchandra, who is now joined as a party respondent to the above petitions and would hereinafter be referred to as respondent or complainant whereas petitioner would be referred to as petitioner or accused for the sake of convenience.
(3.) THE case of the prosecution in brief is that petitioner entered into an agreement with the respondent on 11-5-1987. On record there is no detailed agreement as is normally found in case of building construction but the booking memo is treated as agreement and there is no dispute between the parties that this was entered into on 11-5-1987. The said document states that this is to confirm and record that they have agreed that Om Shanti Construction Company had agreed to sell and M/s. Aracde (India) Pvt. Ltd. had agreed to purchase office/flat/row house Nos. 9 to 33, 43 and 44 on the ground floor of building A, B and C Wings for aggregate price of Rs. 35 lakhs exclusive of all other deposits, registration, legal and stamp charges and costs. The schedule of payment is stated over-leaf and it is not disputed by the accused that Rs. 7 lakhs were paid as booking amount by cheque. A plan showing the situation of these shops was also provided to the respondent. As per this plan certain shops were to be of 258 sq. ft. , certain shops were of 285 sq. ft. whereas shops Nos. 43 and 44 were of 1455 sq. ft. Om Shanti Co-operative Housing Society is a registered society whereas Om Shanti Construction company is a partnership firm.