C.R. No. 8452 of 2015. Case: Ramesh Kumar Napa Vs Iqbal Krishan Sharma. High Court of Punjab (India)

Case NumberC.R. No. 8452 of 2015
CounselFor Appellant: D.K. Tuteja, Advocate and For Respondents: Party-in-Person
JudgesDaya Chaudhary, J.
IssueCode of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) - Order XXIII Rules 1, 2, 3; Constitution of India - Article 227; Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Sections 62, 63, 65, 66; Indian Penal Code 1860, (IPC) - Sections 323, 34, 420, 452, 506; Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Sections 3, 4
Judgement DateMarch 07, 2017
CourtHigh Court of Punjab (India)


Daya Chaudhary, J.

1. The present revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside impugned order dated 23.09.2015 (Annexure P-12) passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Hisar whereby the application filed by petitioner/defendant for dismissal of the suit filed by respondent-plaintiff, keeping in view the compromise arrived at between the parties, has been dismissed.

2. Briefly the facts of the case are that the petitioner-defendant entered into an agreement to sell dated 29.6.2011 with respondent-plaintiff relating to plot bearing No. 598 measuring 6 Marla situated at Sector-5, Hansi, District Hisar. The petitioner-defendant even received a sum of ` 3 lacs as earnest money. As per case of the petitioner, he was always ready and willing to perform his part of contract and even called upon the respondent by virtue of legal notice dated 12.5.2012 but respondent-plaintiff did not turn up to get the plot transferred in his name. However, an FIR bearing No. 319 dated 2.4.2012 under Section 420 IPC was registered at Police Station City Hisar against the petitioner-defendant in which challan was presented and ultimately the petitioner was held guilty vide judgment dated 20.7.2013 for commission of offence punishable under Section 420 IPC and was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year with a fine of ` 500/-. Petitioner also filed a criminal complaint under Sections 452, 323, 506/34 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as 'The SCST Act') against respondent before the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hisar, which was pending adjudication at the time of passing of judgment dated 20.7.2013. Against this judgment of conviction and order of sentence, petitioner filed a criminal appeal in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Hisar. The respondent-plaintiff also filed civil suit in the Court of Civil Judge, (Junior Division), Hisar for recovery of ` 8, 29,500/- against the amount of earnest money of ` 3 lacs paid by the respondent to the petitioner. Written statement to the suit was filed by the petitioner-defendant.

3. Three rounds of litigation were pending in different Courts between the same parties i.e. (i) criminal complaint filed by the petitioner against the respondent, (ii) criminal appeal filed by the petitioner against judgment of conviction and order of sentence and (iii) civil suit for recovery filed by the respondent against the petitioner.

4. During the pendency of aforesaid three proceedings, the petitioner and respondent entered into a compromise on 23.1.2015. Respondent-plaintiff got deposited a sum of ` 3,50,000/- in bank after taking it from the petitioner. With regard to receipt of said amount of ` 3,50,000/- has also been mentioned in the compromise. It has also been mentioned that now he will have no claim with regard to balance amount from the petitioner. It was also mentioned in the compromise that he will withdraw all the pending cases and would not lay any claim. In pursuance of said compromise, petitioner also withdrew his criminal complaint filed under Sections 452, 506, 323/34 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the SCST Act on 27.1.2015 and got his statement recorded before the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hisar. On the basis of the statement made by the petitioner to the effect that compromise has been arrived at between the parties, the complaint of the petitioner was dismissed and the respondent was discharged. Similarly, the petitioner also moved an application with "no objection" from the respondent before the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Hisar for taking up the appeal which was pending adjudication. On 27.1.2015, respondent had to come present in Court along with the original compromise but he did not bring the compromise. However, the parties were permitted to compound the matter in view of compromise arrived at between them. The offence under Section 420 IPC was also allowed to be compounded and thereafter the petitioner was acquitted of the charge on 27.1.2015. On the basis of compromise, petitioner withdrew his criminal complaint as well as criminal appeal. As per case of the petitioner, respondent promised the petitioner to withdraw his suit for recovery but subsequently respondent refused to withdraw the suit as per compromise. Thereafter, the petitioner filed an application before Civil Judge (Junior Division), Hisar to dismiss the suit for...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT