VIRANDER KUMAR SACHDEVA Vs. VIJAYKUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure praying for the stay of the proceedings of the Criminal Complaint Case No.12 dated 20-3-1995 under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short to be referred as the Act) and pending before the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Anandpur Sahib during the pendency of civil litigation which is also pending between the same parties and with regard to the same matter under the name and style of Vijay Kumar v. Virander Kumar.

(2.) It is alleged that petitioner Virender Kumar Sachdeva is the owner of M/s Nangal Gas Service and the respondent Shri Vijay Kumar filed the said complaint on the ground that the petitioner had issued a cheque in favour of the complainant-respondent for a sum of Rs.15 lacs in view of the agreement dated 5-3-1985 on 16-12-1994 and when the said cheque was presented for being encashed with the bankers it bounced due to the paucity of funds. After issuing a notice as required by Section 138 of the Act calling upon the petitioner to pay the amount of the disputed cheque within the time mentioned therein and on failure of the payment of the amount of cheque, the complaint case was filed for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Act.

(3.) It is alleged that the petitioner filed a civil suit being suit No.20 dated 19-1-1995 against the respondent in request of the said Gas Agency and prayed for the relief of the permanent injunction and in the alternative for possession on the ground that the petitioner was the sole proprietor of M/s. Nangal Gas Service. Respondent Vijay Kumar along with Pawan Kumar, Ashok Kumar, Naresh Kumar was unnecessarily interfering in the working of the petitioner. The petitioner contended in the civil suit that the Indian Oil Company Ltd. had appointed him as the sole Distributor of LPG on 23-12-1985. The agreement was also entered into between the petitioner and the Indian Oil Company. However, respondent Vijay Kumar along with others started threatening the petitioner and interfering in the functioning of the distribution of LPG Cylinders and made attempts to dispossess the petitioner from the said property. Respondent Vijay Kumar filed his written statement before the Civil Court and took a plea that a partnership deed had been entered into on 5-3-1985 according to which share of the petitioners of 25% whereas the share of Vijay Kumar respondent was of 75% and the profits and losses were also to shared in that proportion only. As per clause VIII of the agreement the petitioner had to surrender the Gas Agency and was to transfer the same in the name of Smt. Punam wife of Vijay Kumar after December 1994 with the approval of the Corporation and if he failed to do so, the petitioner was to pay a sum of Rs. 15 lacs on account of the finances incurred by Sh. Vijay Kumar and also for the damages and service rendered by respondent Vijay Kumar. The Civil Court framed issues including the issue as to whether the petitioner was the sole proprietor of the disputed concern M/s. Nangal Gas Service and whether the respondent Vijay Kumar entered into and executed the partnership deed, referred to above, on 5-3-1985 regarding the said concern.