Chandrakant S/O Ramprakash Satija v. Tumulari Ram Mohan And ANR

904-c Cri. APPEAL-30-2011

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.30 OF 2011 Chandrakant S/o Ramprakash Satija ..Vrs.. Tumulari Ram Mohan and another ____________________________________________________________________________________________ Ofce Notes, Ofce Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's order and Registrar's orders.

Shri. A. R. Prasad, Advocate for appellant Shri. R. D. Zade h/f Shri. P. N. Kothari, Advocate for respondent nos.1 and 2 Shri. I. J. Damle, APP for respondent/State.

CORAM :

N . B. SURYAWANSHI, J.

DATED :

th FEBRUARY , 2021.

1.

By this appeal, the appellant challenges the judgment in Summary Criminal Complaint No.8564 of 2008 passed by 22nd Judicial Magistrate First Class and Special Court, Nagpur, thereby acquitting the respondent nos.1 and 2 from the ofence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. This appeal was admitted and is pending for fnal hearing.

2.

The appellant and respondent nos.1 and 2 have amicably settled the matter and they have jointly submitted Compromise Pursis No.1 of 2021 on record signed by them, wherein the terms and conditions of settlement are mentioned. In terms of the settlement, the respondent nos.1 and 2 have agreed and undertaken to pay an amount of Rs.6,00,000/- to the appellant in six installments

904-c Cri. APPEAL-30-2011 during 15.04.2021 to 15.07.2022. The parties are duly identifed by their respective advocates.

3.

It appears from the compromise pursis that total fourteen criminal cases were lodged by the appellant against the respondent nos.1 and 2 under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, in which the respondents were acquitted. Therefore, fourteen appeals are fled by the appellant challenging the acquittal of the respondents. The numbers of fourteen appeals are mentioned in the compromise pursis and all the appeals are compromised as per the compromise pursis.

4.

The compromise is treated as an undertaking to this Court. The appeal is disposed of in terms of compromise.

(N. B. SURYAWANSHI, J.) TAMBE