Ashok Kumar Gupta & Ors. vs The State & Anr. on 19 July, 2023
3. Common brief facts as per the case of complainant are that
the accused No. 4 represented the complainant to be Director of
the company Lotus Floriculture Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to
as the Company) and in month of May 2013, accused no. 4
offered to sell the property bearing Plot no. 55, 3rd Floor,
Sukhdev Vihar, New Delhi-110025 and complainant entered into
an agreement dated 17.05.2013 for the purchase of the said
property for a total consideration of Rs.2,20,00,000/- and paid an
earnest money of Rs.60 lacs was paid to the accused persons, for
which Rs.40 Lacs were paid through RTGS and Rs.20 Lacs were
advanced in cash. Due to non-performance of contract/
agreement, the cheque in question dated 22.08.2014 was issued
by accused persons for discharge of the legal debt/liability for
Page no. 3 of 21
CA 107/2025 M/s Lotus Floriculture LLP Vs State of Delhi & Ors.
CA 42/2025 Vipin Kumar Gupta Vs. State of Delhi & Ors.