TMI Blog2021 (11) TMI 940X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... profile and is required to have precedence over punitive mechanism, therefore, the present revision petitions deserve to be allowed. Petition allowed. - CRR-120-2019 , CRR-115-2019 , CRR-116-2019 - - - Dated:- 16-11-2021 - HON BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL For the Appellant : N.P. Bhardwaj and Kajal Saini, Advocates For the Respondents : K.L. Kohli, Advocate and Vasundhara Dalal Anand, APP ORDER Vikas Bahl, J. (Oral) This common order shall dispose of all the three criminal revision petitions i.e. CRR-120-2019, filed by M/s. Shiva International through its Proprietor Shyam Sunder Bansal Vs. Balvir Singh Multani and U.T. Chandigarh and CRR-115-2019 and CRR-116-2019 both filed by M/s. Balaji Enterprises through its Proprietor Hitesh Bansal and Hitesh Bansal Vs. Sonia Multani and U.T. Chandigarh. Mr. Balvir Singh Multani and Sonia Multani, who are the complainants/respondents in the above said cases are husband and wife. Hitesh Bansal, proprietor of M/s. Balaji Enterprises is the son of Shyam Sunder Bansal, who is the proprietor of M/s. Shiva International. Complaint No. 1527 of 2016 was filed by Balvir Singh Multani against Ms/ Shiv International and Sh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Chandigarh, vide judgment dated 18.01.2019. It is the said two judgments which are being challenged in CRR-116-2019. During the pendency of these connected cases, the matter was referred to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court as Mediation Case No. 627-A of 2021 and settlement/agreement has been arrived at between the parties. The relevant portion of the same is reproduced hereinbelow:- MEDIATION AND CONCILIATION CENTRE OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT, CHANDIGARH Mediation Case No. 627-A of 2021 Re: CRR- 115 of 2019 M/s. Balaji Enterprises and Another Vs. Sonia Multani CRR-No. 116 of 2019 M/s. Balaji Enterprises and Another Vs. Sonia Multani CRR No. 120 of 2019 M/s. Shiva Enterprise and another Vs. Balvir Multani SETTLEMENT/AGREEMENT This SETTLEMENT/AGREEMENT is entered into between 1. Hitesh Bansal aged 34 years S/o Shyam Sunder Bansal, Prop. Of Ms. Balajit Enterprises, R/o H. No. D003, Maya Garden, Phase- I VIP Road, Zirakpur, District Mohali. 2. Shyam Sunder Bansal, aged 66 years, R/o H. No. D003, Maya Garden, Phase- I VIP Road, Zirakpur, District Mohali. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7. Sonia Multani-Second party wife of Balvir Multani is receiving, this amount on her behalf and also in the case No. CRR-120 of 2019 titled M/s. Shiva Enterprises and another Vs. Balvir Singh Multani, on behalf of Balvir Singh Multani her husband. Power of Attorney in favour of Sonia Multani by Balvir Singh Multani is being attached with the settlement. 8. The process of mediation was explained to the parties and with their consent the mediation proceedings were carried out. Joint as well as separate sessions were held today. The parties with the assistance of the Mediator- Ms. Tulika, voluntarily have arrived at an amicable solution, resolving the above mentioned disputes and differences. 9. The parties hereto confirm and declare that they have voluntarily and of their own free will arrived at this Settlement/Agreement in the presence of the Mediator. 10. As per knowledge of both the parties, there is no other pending litigation between the parties qua the present dispute. 11. The parties further undertake not to initiate or institute any unwanted litigation against each other and their family arising out of the matter in dispute. 12. This compromise ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... present in Court, has submitted that the terms of compromise are genuine and bona fide and has submitted that he has received the amount as per the compromise and has no objection in case, all three revision petitions are allowed and the impugned judgments of conviction passed and then upheld in appeal, in all the three cases, are set aside in view of the said compromise. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners are ready to deposit 15% of the amount of the dishonoured cheques i.e. ₹ 16,335/- (being 15% of ₹ 1,08,900/- which is the total amount of all the four cheques), within a period of two weeks from today with the U.T. Legal Services Authority, in accordance with the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Damodar S. Prabhu Vs. Sayed Babalal H, (2010) 5 SCC 663. Learned counsel for U.T., Chandigarh, has submitted that she would have no objection in case the revision petitions are disposed of as the matter stands compromised and in fact, in the present case, State has no role to play. From the above facts, it is apparent that both the contesting parties are ad idem with respect to the fact that the compromise has be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
