Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Gujarat High Court

The Uber Waghari Samudayik Kheti ... vs State Of Gujarat & on 30 September, 2015

Author: J.B.Pardiwala

Bench: J.B.Pardiwala

                   R/SCR.A/2629/2010                                             ORDER




                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                    SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2629 of 2010


                                              With
                    SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2630 of 2010
         ==========================================================
              THE UBER WAGHARI SAMUDAYIK KHETI SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD -
                               THRO & 1....Applicant(s)
                                      Versus
                        STATE OF GUJARAT & 1....Respondent(s)
         ==========================================================
         Appearance:
         MR P P MAJMUDAR, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1 - 2
         MR SP MAJMUDAR, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1 - 2
         MS HANSA PUNANI, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
         RULE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 2
         ==========================================================

                   CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA



                                       Date : 30/09/2015


                                        ORAL ORDER

1. Since   the   issues   involved   in   both   the  captioned applications are more or less the same  those   were   heard   analogously   and   are   being  disposed of by this common order. 

2. Rule   returnable   forthwith.   Ms.   Punani,   the  learned APP, waives service of notice of rule for  Page 1 of 6 HC-NIC Page 1 of 6 Created On Sun Oct 04 01:37:39 IST 2015 R/SCR.A/2629/2010 ORDER and on behalf of the respondent No.1.

3. By   these   writ­applications,   the   applicants  pray   for   quashing   of   two   First   Information  Reports being C.R. No. I­50/2010 registered with  the Vedach Police Station, District: Bharuch and  C.R.   No.   I­49/2010   registered   with   the   same  Police   Station   for   the   offence   punishable   under  Sections   406,   409   and   120B   of   the   Indian   Penal  Code. 

4. It appears from the materials on record that  the Co­operation Officer serving with the Office  of   the   District   Registrar,   Co­operative   Society  lodged two First Information Reports referred to  above, against the applicants, in connection with  sale of two parcels of land which were allotted  by   the   State   Government   many   years   back   on  certain terms and conditions. The applicant No.1  is   a   Co­operative   Society   registered   under   the  Co­operative Societies Act. The applicant No.2 is  the   Secretary   of   the   said   Society.   The   case   of  Page 2 of 6 HC-NIC Page 2 of 6 Created On Sun Oct 04 01:37:39 IST 2015 R/SCR.A/2629/2010 ORDER the   respondent   No.2­original   first   informant   is  that   although   the   Society   was   not   supposed   to  sell   the   land   which   was   allotted   by   the  Government   subject   to   certain   terms   and  conditions,   yet   behind   the   back   of   the   State  Government the land being new tenure was sold to  a   company   viz.   M/s.   Sterling   Erection   and  Infrastructure   Private  Limited   by way of  a  sale  deed   for   a   total   sale   consideration   of   Rs.   51  lac. On such allegations, the FIR was registered.  It appears that on 30th April, 2012 the following  order was passed:­ "Heard the learned counsels for the parties. In   both   petitions,   learned   counsel   for   the   petitioners   submits   that,   by   order   dated   26.2.2010   passed   by   the   Deputy   Collector,   Bharuch, the land did vest into the Government   and, subsequently, by executing a deed, entries   came to be reversed.

Considering the above, Rule.

Interim relief in terms of paragraph 21[B] in  both petitions."

5. It   is   not   in   dispute   that   the   Deputy  Collector, Bharuch vide order dated 26th February,  Page 3 of 6 HC-NIC Page 3 of 6 Created On Sun Oct 04 01:37:39 IST 2015 R/SCR.A/2629/2010 ORDER 2010, cancelled the allotment of land in question  and the same after forfeiture got vested into the  Government.   It   is   also   not   in   dispute   that   the  entries   which   were   mutated   pursuant   to   the  transactions between the Society and the Company  were   ordered   to   be   deleted   and   the   name   of   the  State  Government   has been  mutated  in  the record  of rights. It is also not in dispute that later  on, the entire sale transaction was reversed and  the Society paid a total sum of Rs. 71,10,000/­  to the Company who had purchased the land. 

6. Thus, it appears that the entire transaction  was   set   at   naught.   The   parcels   of   land   are   in  possession   of   the   State   Government   as   noted  above. The monetary advantage, which was derived  by   the   petitioners,   i.e.   the   Society,   has   been  paid   back   to   the   Company.   It   appears   that   the  Company had purchased the parcels of land for a  total  sale  consideration  of Rs.51  lac,  but  when  the   transaction   was   reversed,   the   Society   paid  the total amount of Rs.71,10,000/­. It is pointed  Page 4 of 6 HC-NIC Page 4 of 6 Created On Sun Oct 04 01:37:39 IST 2015 R/SCR.A/2629/2010 ORDER out   by   the   learned   advocate   that   by   way   of   two  deeds   of   cancellation   of   sale,   Rs.57   lac   and  Rs.71 lac respectively has been paid back to the  Company.

7. In the aforesaid background, I am of the view  that the proceedings could be terminated. 

8. In the result these applications are allowed.  Both the First Information Report being C.R. No.  I­50 of 2010 and C.R. No. 49 of 2010 lodged with  Vedach   Police   Station,   Bharuch   are   hereby  quashed.   All   consequential   proceedings   pursuant  to   such   FIRs   stand   terminated.   Rule   is   made  absolute. Direct service is permitted. 





                                                                 (J.B.PARDIWALA, J.)




                                       Page 5 of 6

HC-NIC                              Page 5 of 6      Created On Sun Oct 04 01:37:39 IST 2015
                  R/SCR.A/2629/2010                                           ORDER


         Manoj




                                        Page 6 of 6

HC-NIC                               Page 6 of 6      Created On Sun Oct 04 01:37:39 IST 2015