VATIKA LIMITED Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner No.1 Vatika Limited Company having its Corporate Office at Gurgaon through one of its Directors Mr. Gaurav Bhalla has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court by way of petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of First Information Report (Annexure P15) registered under Section 420 etc. IPC with Police Station Gurgaon Sadar against the petitioner Company on the strength of grounds canvassed in the petition.

(2.) THE essential factual matrix as is highlighted by the petitioners is that the petitioner Company which is dabbling in the real estate sector, had come up with a commercial colony under the name of 'Vatika Business Park' situated in the revenue estate of village Badshahpur, Tehsil and District Gurgaon. Petitioner No.2 entered into an agreement dated 06.11.2007 with the petitioner No.1 Company (which two are headed by the same person) for the construction of this complex. For the purchase of 3458.22 sq. ft. super area on 7th floor of the building, respondent No.2 submitted an application dated 04.07.2011 (Annexure P2) to petitioner No.1, for which allotment letter dated 25.08.2011 (Annexure P3) containing terms and conditions was issued leading to execution of agreement to sell (Annexure P4) on 27.08.2011. Entire sale price of this unit stood paid by respondent No.2. The unit in question was offered for possession to respondent No.2 on 16.04.2012 vide Annexure P6 as per the stand of the petitioners. It is inter alia alleged that respondent No.2 failed to execute a separate maintenance contract in spite of request by way of communication dated 10.02.2012 (Annexure P5) and thus the possession could not be handed over to respondent No.2.

(3.) IT is thereafter over this when the petitioner No.1 failed to hand over the possession, respondent No.2 made a complaint to Economic Offences Wing alleging that the accused petitioners have acted in a dishonest manner and even after receiving full payment of the premises refused to hand over its possession and thus, have dishonestly and malafidely cheated her, leading to registration of the case on 23.02.2015, for the quashment of which the petitioners have impugned.