GST Helpdesk   Subscription   Demo   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2017 (3) TMI 336 - DELHI HIGH COURT

2017 (3) TMI 336 - DELHI HIGH COURT - TMI - Complaint case under Section 138 NI Act - effect of settlement - Held that:- Once the parties have settled their disputes and have arrived a settlement, the same should be given effect in entirety and should be treated as a solemn settlement. - Mr. Rakesh Kapoor who is present in Court, states that he cannot return back the money. Thus the respondent No.2 having taken the benefit of the settlement, the other terms of the settlement, arrived at bet .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

case under Section 138 NI Act is filed, the charge sheet has been filed, the same is liable to be quashed in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties and the respondent No.2 having taken the benefit of the settlement. - Consequently, FIR No. 1111/1998 under Sections 420/467/468/471 IPC registered at PS Kalkaji, Delhi and the proceedings pursuant thereto are hereby quashed. - CRL.M.C. 790/2012 and Crl. M.A. No. 2765/2012 (Stay) - Dated:- 1-3-2017 - MS. MUKTA GUPTA J. Petitioners .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ies have settled the matter. 3. A perusal of the record would reveal that the respondent No.2 Rakesh Kapoor filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (in short the NI Act ) wherein S.N. Bansal, petitioner No.1 was convicted. The conviction was upheld by this Court and S.N. Bansal thereafter approached the Hon ble Supreme Court by filing special leave petition being SLP (Crl.) No.5036/2004. The SLP was dismissed by the Hon ble Supreme Court on 15th October, 2004. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

31st January, 2005 before the Hon ble Supreme Court are as under: IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SPECIAL LEAVE PETITON (CRL.) NO.331 OF 2005 IN THE MATTER OF: Rakesh Kapoor Petitioner/ Complainant Versus S.N. Bansal & Anr. Respondents/ Accused JOINT MEMO OF COMPROMISE BETWEEN THE COMPLAINANT RAKESH KAPOOR AND THE ACCUSED S.N. BANSAL PURSUANT TO THE DIRECTIONS OF THE HON BLE SUPREME COURT BY ORDER DATED 28.1.2005. 1. That the complainant Rakesh Kapoor and the a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rties to file a joint Memo of Compromise supported by the affidavits of both the parties. Hence this Joint Memo of Compromise. 2. That the Complainant Rakesh Kapoor has received a certain amount and also a post-dated cheque for ₹ 7 lakhs from the accused S.N. Bansal towards the full and final settlement of all his claims against S.N. Bansal. 3. That no amount is due from S.N. Bansal and the Complainant is willing to compound the offence of which S.N. Bansal has been convicted by the Court .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ble Court that the said post-dated cheque of ₹ 7 lakhs shall be honoured on its due date. 6. That the Complainant has no objection in receiving the balance amount by the said post dated cheque of ₹ 7 lakhs, in view of the undertaking of the accused to this Hon ble Court. 7. That there are no criminal or civil cases instituted by Rakesh Kapoor pending before any court and if any such case is brought to the notice of Rakesh Kapoor, the same shall be withdrawn by making an appropriate a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

uary, 2005 at New Delhi. Both the parties have also filed their respective affidavits in support of this Memo of Compromise. 5. In lieu of the claim of the respondent No. 2, the complaint was lodged for two cheque as according to Rakesh Kapoor one cheque was lost from the office of his counsel. The amount of the two cheques dishonoured was approximately ₹ 1.50 crores as against which a settlement was arrived for a sum of ₹ 45 lakhs between the parties which was handed over through di .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e entered into a settlement. Despite service respondent No.2 was not appearing and thus, the SHO concerned was directed to ensure the presence of respondent No.2 in Court today. 7. Rakesh Kapoor, who is present in Court and is identified by the Investigating Officer, does not deny that a settlement was arrived at between the parties and that he had signed the joint memo of compromise between the parties as noted above before the Hon ble Supreme Court. He further states that at that time the sett .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

with the petitioners. 8. Thus the respondent No.2 compelled by his circumstances settled the matter and not under duress either from the petitioners or from the Court. On a query put to Mr.Rakesh Kapoor as to whether he was ready to restore the petitioners to status quo ante by refunding the amount received with interest thereon, he states that he is not in a position to restore the amount. 9. The Supreme Court in the decision reported as 2005 (3) SCC 302 Mohd. Shamim & Ors. vs. Nahid Begum .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

g quashing of FIR contending that the affidavit was got signed from her by misrepresentation of facts. The Supreme Court held that the denial of the execution of the deed of settlement was an afterthought and cannot be accepted in view of the fact that the settlement was arrived at the intervention of the judicial officer of the rank of Additional Sessions Judge and ex-facie the settlement appears to be genuine. The Supreme Court further held that the continuance of the criminal proceedings agai .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e report is as under: 9. Reverting to the case at hand, it is clear from the settlement that the parties had agreed to bury all their differences. The complainant was also facing criminal proceedings under Sections 498A/406/34, IPC and also under Section 125, Cr.P.C. He has been the beneficiary of the settlement inasmuch as the proceedings under Section 125, Cr.P.C. are withdrawn by Sarita and proceedings under Sections 498A/406/34, IPC are also quashed in view of the cooperation of Sarita. This .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tes through the process of Mediation. Therefore, once disputes between the parties have been settled by the process of mediation, it would be in the public interest as well to attach importance to such a process and treat the settlement as a solemn settlement. Otherwise, the movement of mediation may itself suffer if the parties are given to understand that even after they agree for settlement, one of the parties can still back out. 11. Similar view was taken by this Court in the decision report .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

itigations were pending between the husband and wife. Matter was compromised before the Family Court pursuant whereof, a decree of divorce by mutual consent was granted. Wife withdrew application filed by her under Section 125 Cr.P.C. in terms of the settlement, however, she avoided to withdraw the complaint under Sections 498-A/328/506 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. Accordingly, husband filed a petition before the High Court of Uttaranchal for quashing of the said .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version