Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: acharya arun dev in M/S Devidayal Builders vs State on 25 May, 2017Matching Fragments
3 I have heard learned counsel for the revisionist, Ld. Counsel for respondent and Ld. PP for the State.
4 Perusal of the trial court record reveals that petitioner has filed an application U/s 156 (3 ) Cr. P. C. It is submitted that complainant was engaged in the business of development and construction of properties. One Sh. Acharya Arun Dev ( since deceased ), in connivance with respondent no. 3 and 4 represented to the complainant that they were trustees of respondent no. 3 and were entitled to a piece of land measuring around 68 acres situated at village Karkardooma, Tehsil Shahdara for development and construction of a housing projects namely, 'Growth Park' on the said land. Representative of the complainant entered entered into a development collaboration agreement dated 15.7.197 with respondents no.3 & 4 on the misrepresentation of Sh. S. K. Birla and Sh. L. N. Birla, according to which the complainant had absolute right to develop the aforesaid piece of land. As a consideration for development of the piece of land, the complainant was supposed to be given 4,31,200 sq. ft of built up area after completion of the project. At the time of entering into the agreement, the complainant paid (Parveen Singh) CR No. 07/16 Spl Judge, CBI02, NDD 4 of 10 16.03.2016 Rs. 85 lacs to Ms. Reeta Jain and O. P. Khaitan and an amount of Rs. 1.55 Crore was kept in a escrow account with respondent no.6 for Sh. S. K. Birla. The said amount was not released to the complainant despite his asking. On 26.5.1989, Acharya Arun Dev executed an M.O.U., whereby developments rights of the complainant were transferred to him. Achraya Arun Dev in connivance with respondent No. 3, respondent no.4 Sh. S. K. Birla and Sh. L. N. Birla entered into an agreement dated 7.8.89 with respondent no. 5 whereby he agreed to sell, transfer and assign salable FAR in the buildings to be constructed in the aforesaid project under Development Collaboration Agreement with respondent no. 5. On 16.10.90 respondents no. 3 & 4 entered into an MOU with respondent no.2 whereby respondents agreed to transfer rights in the project land to respondent no. 2. The respondent no.1 entered into an MOU dated 25.4.2003 with complainant, Acharya Arun Dev and respondent no. 2 This MOU dated 25.4.2003 was lateron converted into an agreement dated 8.8.2005. The complainant has thus alleged cheating and fraud by the respondents. The complainant lodged a complaint with PS Mandir Marg against the respondents but no action was taken by the police. Aggrieved by inaction of SHO, PS Mandir Marg, the complainant lodged a complaint with DCP, Parliament Street but no action was taken on this complaint. Therefore, the complainant approached the court by way of (Parveen Singh) CR No. 07/16 Spl Judge, CBI02, NDD 5 of 10 16.03.2016 application U/s 156 (3) Cr. P. C. 5 Perusal of file reveals that the ld. Trial court calls for the status report and the status report is filed by the police. In the status report it is categorically mentioned that it is the main grievance of the complainant that he had invested Rs. 85 lacs for getting the land free from occupiers but no proof of such payment was filed with the complaint. It is also mentioned that as per agreement dated 15.7.87 it was the obligation of the owner of the land to pay the encroaches and not the obligation of Devi Dayal Builders and the escrow amount of Rs. 1.55 Crore was deposited with Sh. O. P. Khaitan by M/s SML. It is also mentioned that this agreement conveys that the complainant had complete knowledge of the facts and there was no mis representation. The entire dispute among the parties is of civil nature. Nothing has been developed on the land and none of the agreement among the parties could be implemented for want of requisite sanction. It is also mentioned that no cognizable offence has been committed within the jurisdiction of P. S. Mandir Marg.