← Library
Bombay High CourtREVN/51/2015others disposed off

Ajaykumar Amichand Kharra v. Centurian Bank Ltd And ANR

2016-06-20Hon'Ble Justice Revati Mohite Dere4 pages

Anand IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.51 OF 2015 Ajaykumar Amichand Kharra .Applicant Vs.

Centurian Bank Ltd. & anr.

.Respondents Mr.M.Parekh, Advocate, for the Applicant Mr.Arjun Pawar a/w. Mr.S.Patil i/b. M/s.Vivek Patil & Associates, Advocate, for the Respondent No.1 Mrs.R.V.Newton, APP, for the Respondent No.2 - State Mr.Pramod Kapadi, HDFC, Bank officer for the Respondent No.1 is present CORAM :

REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

DATE : 20.06.2016 P.C.

.

Learned counsel for the Applicant and the learned counsel for the Respondent No.l state that the parties have amicably settled their dispute. They have tendered the Consent Terms entered into by and between the Applicant and the Respondent No.1. The said Consent Terms are taken on record and marked as "X" for identification. It appears that the parties have

mutually agreed to settle the dispute and that the Respondent No.1 has agreed to accept a total sum of Rs.60,000/- towards full and final settlement. It is stated that the said amount of Rs.60,000/- has already been paid by the Applicant to the Respondent No.1. From the consent Terms, it also appears that it is mutually agreed by the parties, that the Respondent No.1 shall consent to allow the Applicant to withdraw a sum of Rs.15,000/- which was deposited vide Receipt No.142 Sr.No.68 and a sum of Rs.5,000/- deposited vide Receipt No.141 Sr.No.67 with the learned Judicial Magistrate F.C., Nasik, pursuant to an order dated 04.02.2015 passed by this Court. The Respondent No.1 has also consented to allow the Applicant to withdraw a sum of Rs.17,000/- deposited by the Applicant in the Sessions Court, Nasik at the time of the admission of the Appeal. The Applicant and the authorized representative of the Respondent No.1 are present in the Court

today and have been identified by their respective counsels.

The authorized representative of the Respondent No.1, who is present in Court states that he has no objection, if the impugned Judgment and Order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Nasik dated 31.01.2015 in Cri.Appeal No.92 of 2008 and the impugned Judgment and Order passed by the learned 6th Judicial Magistrate F.C.,Nasik dated 09.04.2008 in S.C.C.No.2366 of 2004 are quashed & set aside and the Applicant is acquitted.

2.

Having regard to the aforesaid, the Application is allowed on the aforesaid terms. Accordingly, the Judgment and Order dated 09.04.2008 passed in S.C.C.No.2366 of 2004 by the learned 6th Judicial Magistrate F.C., Nasik and the Judgment and Order dated 31.01.2015 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Nasik in Cri.Appeal No.92 of 2008 are quashed & set aside and the Applicant is acquitted.

3.

The Application is accordingly disposed of.

(REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.)