Tdi Infrastructure Ltd. v. The State (Govt. Of NCT Of Delhi) & ORS.

34# $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 3703/2016 and Crl. M.A. Nos. 20216/2016 and 687/2017 TDI INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.

..... Petitioner Represented by:

Ms.Kanika Agnihotri, Mr.Vaibhav Agnihotri, Mr.Preet Singh Oberoi and Mr.Siddharth Arora, Advocates with Mr. Ritesh Vighani, Authorised Representative in person.

versus THE STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) & ORS...... Respondents Represented by:

Mr. Piyush Singhal, Advocate for Mr.

Ashish Aggarwal, Additional Standing Counsel for State with SI Rajesh Kumar, PS B.K. Road.

Mr. Neeraj Sharma, Mr. Satpal Sharma and Mr.Ashok Sondhi, Advocates for respondent No. 2 with respondent No.2 in person.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA

O R D E R

% 22.05.2018 By the present petition, petitioner has sought quashing of FIR No. 137/2014 under Sections 420/120 IPC registered at PS Barakhamba Road, Delhi on the complaint of respondent No.2 and the proceedings pursuant thereto.

In the petition it was inter alia urged that in the proceedings before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, parties have settled the matter on 23rd December, 2014, whereafter the respondent No.2 did not appear

before the Consumer Forum.

Respondent No. 2 who is present in Court and is identified by the learned counsel states that he is not interested in taking possession of the flat but seeks refund of his money along with interest thereon and a compensation for the litigation he pursued in these years. Parties have taken forward the settlement arrived at before the District Consumer Redressal Forum on 23rd December, 2014 and in terms of settlement respondent No.2 has received a cheque of ₹19,42,036/- dated 26th May, 2018 drawn on Indian Bank, Connaught Place, New Delhi. Respondent No.2 states that he has now no claim whatsoever against the petitioner and he does not wish to pursue the above noted FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto against all the accused. Authorised representative of the petitioner is present in Court and is identified by the learned counsel. He affirms the statement of Respondent No.2.

In view of the fact that the parties have amicably resolved their differences of their own free will, volition and without any coercion and no useful purpose will be served in continuance of the proceedings, it would be in the interest of justice to quash the abovementioned FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto. There is no legal impediment in quashing the FIR in question.

Consequently, FIR No. 137/2014 under Sections 420/120 IPC registered at PS Barakhamba Road, Delhi and proceedings pursuant thereto are hereby quashed qua all the accused.

Authorised Representative of petitioner and respondent No.2 have signed this order sheet in acknowledgment of their statements made before this Court.

Petition and application are disposed of. Order dasti. MUKTA GUPTA, J.

MAY 22, 2018 'vn'