Patna High Court - Orders
Hari Challa vs The State Of Bihar on 15 January, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL REVISION No.464 of 2019
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-5153 Year-2017 Thana- PATNA COMPLAINT CASE District-
Patna
======================================================
HARI CHALLA & Ors.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar & Anr.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Gouranga Chatterjee, Adv.,
Mr. Nilanjan Chatterjee, Adv.,
Mr. Sahil Kumar, Adv.,
Mr. Ujjwal Raj, Adv.,
Mr. Pulkit Ranjan, Adv.,
Mr. Anirvan Choudhuri, Adv.,
Mr. Roushan Kumar, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Shantanu Kumar, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIBEK CHAUDHURI
ORAL ORDER
5 15-01-2024This is an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act filed by the petitioner, praying for condonation of delay by three days in filing the instant revision.
2. Notice of the instant application was served upon the opposite party and learned Advocate for the opposite party is present.
3. Having heard the learned Advocate for the parties and on perusal of the averments made in the instant application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, I find that the petitioner has been able to prove that he was sufficiently prevented from filing the revisional application within time. Therefore, delay is condoned. The instant revision is taken to file.
4. In course of hearing of the instant Criminal Patna High Court CR. REV. No.464 of 2019(5) dt.15-01-2024 2/3 Revision, which has been filed by the accused persons/petitioners of Complaint Case No. 5153(C) of 2017, against an order upon an application under Section 205 of the Cr.P.C. on 14th December, 2018 passed by the 16th Sub-Judge at Patna, it is ascertained that sometimes in 2011 the opposite party no.2 made an agreement with the Aliens Developer Private Limited, Telangana through its Officers, who are responsible for day to day business of the Company to purchase a flat at Hyderabad, at a consideration price of Rs. 72,73,875/-. It is contended that the opposite party no. 2 had paid Rs. 36,37,187/- as part consideration money of the said flat. It was agreed by between the parties that the rest amount would be paid at the time of delivery of possession of the flat which was stipulated in the agreement. However, subsequently, it is found that the development project was not carried out and the flat in question was not constructed. The petitioners took certain plea that due to legal hurdles and other problems the flat in question could not be constructed and delivered to the opposite party no.2.
5. Learned Advocate for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are ready and willing to repay the amount with interest which they took as part consideration money, but settlement could not be done as the opposite party no. 2 till date Patna High Court CR. REV. No.464 of 2019(5) dt.15-01-2024 3/3 failed to obtain N.O.C. from the Bank, which is required for the petitioners to transfer the flat in question to some other person.
6. In view of such submissions made by the learned Advocate for the opposite party no. 2 and do not admitted but has not been seriously refuted by the learned counsel for the petitioners, this Court is of the opinion that in this sort of litigation parties should come up with monetary settlement.
7. In view of such circumstances, as payed by the learned Advocate for the petitioners, the hearing of the matter is adjourned for four weeks to enable the parties to settle the dispute amongst themselves.
8. If a settlement is made in the meantime, the parties are at liberty to inform this Court in the instant proceeding, failing which the instant proceeding shall be fixed for hearing after a month.
9. The impugned order be stayed for one month from the date of this order.
10. List this case on 15.02.2024.
(Bibek Chaudhuri, J) pravinkumar/-
U T