B.VIJAY KUMAR REDDY Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal petition is filed by the petitioner-accused under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the order passed by the Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad in Crl.R.P.No.25 of 2015 dtd. 2/4/2015 and consequently to direct the IX Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad to take cognizance in CC SR No.4861 of 2014 against the respondents No.2 to 5.

(2.) The case of the petitioner in brief was that he filed a private complaint before the IX Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad against the respondents 2 to 5 for the offences under Sec. 120B, 406 and 420 IPC. On 1/12/2014 the IX Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate dismissed the complaint under Sec. 203 Cr.P.C. The petitioner preferred a revision before the Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad under Sec. 397 Cr.P.C. The said criminal revision case No.25 of 2015 was dismissed on 2/4/2015. He filed the present petition to quash the said order.

(3.) The petitioner further submitted that he along with one Mr. L. Purushotham Reddy entered into an agreement of sale with Respondents No.2 to 5 on 9/1/2006 for purchase of Acs.23.00 of land covered by Sy.Nos.194, 195, 198 and 199 in Kalwakurthy village and Mandal, Mahaboobnagar District @ Rs.6,52,000.00 per acre. All the accused offered to sell the above land for a total sale consideration of Rs.1,52,26,000.00. On the promise made by all the accused, the complainant agreed to purchase the above land for a total sale consideration of Rs.1,52,26,000.00. Out of the total sale consideration, the complainant's father by name B. Yadagiri Reddy (late) paid an amount of Rs.1,00,000.00 on 7/1/2006 at the residence of the complainant and all the accused executed a receipt on Ten rupees non-judicial stamp papers in the presence of witnesses. On 9/1/2006, the complainant along with his partner Purushotham Reddy paid an amount of Rs.30,40,000.00 to all the accused and they inturn executed a receipt on a revenue stamp in the presence of the witnesses. As per the agreement dtd. 9/1/2006, the complainant had to pay the balance sale consideration to the accused within a period of 90 days from 9/1/2006. The complainant got issued a legal notice dtd. 6/4/2006 through their Advocate at Hyderabad requesting all the accused to fulfil the terms and conditions of the agreement of sale dtd. 9/1/2006 and they were ready to pay the balance sale consideration. Having received the legal notice dtd. 6/4/2006, the accused did not comply the conditions as mentioned in the agreement of sale hence, the complainant was constrained to approach the civil court for recovery of money with interest. The same was pending adjudication vide OS. No.265 of 2009 on the file of XII Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad.