Monday, 11, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Shantinath Colonizer Thr. ... vs Gendalal
2021 Latest Caselaw 2720 MP

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 2720 MP
Judgement Date : 26 June, 2021

Madhya Pradesh High Court
Shantinath Colonizer Thr. ... vs Gendalal on 26 June, 2021
Author: Anjuli Palo
                                  1                          MCRC-30941-2019
        The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                  MCRC-30941-2019
      (SHANTINATH COLONIZER THR. PARTNER RAJENDRA CHOUDHARY Vs GENDALAL)

11
Jabalpur, Dated : 26-06-2021
      Heard through Video Conferencing.
      Ms. Namrata K. Agrawal, counsel for the applicant.
      Shri Sunil Kumar Mishra, counsel for the respondent.

Heard on I.A. No. 13955/2019, which is an application for staying the proceedings of NIA No. 562/2018 pending in the Court of Chief Judicial

Magistrate, Sehore.

The facts of the case, in short, are that the applicant is engaged in a business of developing colonies in the name of Shantinath Colonizer and Developers. An agreement was executed between the applicant and the respondent on 19.4.2017. As per the terms and conditions of the agreement, it was resolved between the parties that the respondent shall sell his lands bearing Khasra No. 85/2 area 1.433 hectare, Khasra No. 86/4 area 0.465 hectare (total area 1.898 hectare), situated at village Murli, Patwari Halka No. 37, Revenue No. 03, Vikaskhand Sehore, Tehsil and District Sehore to the

applicant for a total consideration of Rs. 2,24,00,000/- and advance of Rs.1,40,00,000/- was to be paid by the applicant through cheques on different dates as mentioned in the agreement. It was further agreed that the respondent shall get the land measured by the government official before registration of the sale deed and only after measuring the area of the land, the value of the land shall be finalized. As per clause 13 of the agreement, the respondent shall provide approach road with fencing. It was further agreed that after fulfillment of Clause 11 and 13 of the agreement and after paying advance amount by the applicant/buyer, the registered sale deed shall be executed.

As per the terms and conditions of the agreement, the applicant, presented a cheque for Rs. 6 Lakhs in Punjab National Bank, which was 2 MCRC-30941-2019 returned on account of insufficient balance, therefore, the respondent served a legal notice Annexure P-4 to the applicant on 13.2.2018 under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The applicant replied vide Annexure P-5 to the said legal notice. Dissatisfied with the same, the respondent filed a complaint Annexure P-6 in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, hence this petition under

Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant seeking quashment of the aforesaid complaint case and its consequential proceedings.

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that there is no breach of terms and conditions of agreement on the part of the applicant. In fact, the respondent has failed to fulfill his part of the agreement and inspite of the fact that no registration of land took place in favour of the applicant, presented a cheque for Rs. 6 Lakhs. It is further submitted that the dispute between the parties is purely of civil nature, which does not fall within the parameters of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. It is further submitted that there is a serious breach of contract by the respondent and the remedy of filing the civil suit for specific performance of contract is available to the parties. Reliance has been placed on the judgment of Karnataka High Court in the case of Venkatesh Bhat A. Vs. Rohidas Shenoy reported in 2010 Cri.L.J.1061. By way of filing I.A. No. 13955/2019, stay of further proceedings of aforesaid complaint case is prayed.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length. Looking to the terms and conditions of the agreement entered into between the parties (Annexure P-1), admittedly the applicant has paid Rs. 1,40,00,000/- as advance to the respondent and may be the dispute arose between the parties is of civil nature, I.A. No. 13955/2019 is partly allowed.

The trial Court is directed not to pass the final order/judgment in N.I.A. No. 562/2018 till the disposal of this petition.



                                                       (SMT. ANJULI PALO)
                       3    MCRC-30941-2019
                          JUDGE
 PB



Digitally signed by
PRADYUMNA BARVE
Date: 2021.07.01
17:13:59 +05'30'
 

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter