Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 701 (HP)

R. N. Tyagi v. Ruchira Papers Limited

2012-10-10

DEV DARSHAN SUD

body2012
Judgment Dev Darshan, J. These three cases are being disposed of by this common order. The parties have compromised in CMPMO No. 305 of 2012 which is the petition preferred by the defendant challenging the order passed by the learned District Judge dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioner against the order passed by the learned Civil Judge(Senior Division) Sirmour District at Nahan rejecting the application under order 9, Rule 13 filed by the petitioner herein with the prayer for setting aside the ex-parte decree passed against him. 2. Criminal Revision No. 52 of 2005, titled M/s I. D. Packings and another versus M/s Ruchira Papers Limited and another has been preferred against the judgment dated 17.3.2005 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sirmour District at Nahan in Criminal Appeal No. 17-N/10 of 2002, titled M/s I.D. Packings and another versus M/s Ruchira papers and another affirming the judgment passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sirmour District at Nahan in proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) holding the petitioner guilty for the offences under the Act and sentencing the petitioners for imprisonment till the rising of the Court as also to pay fine of Rs.3,20,385/-, which was the amount representing the dishonoured cheques Ex.P2 to P-8. In default of payment of fine amount the learned trial Court directed the petitioner to undergo simple imprisonment for six months. 3. Criminal Appeal No. 752 of 2002, titled M/s Ruchira papers and another versus M/s I.D. Packings and another has been preferred by the complainant/appellant with the prayer that the sentence imposed upon the petitioner Shri R.N. Tyagi was inadequate and sentence be enhanced. 4. I also note that Cr.OPC No. 2 of 2006 titled as Court on its own Motion versus B.R. Sharma was initiated against the counsel as also against Shri R.N. Tyagi on the allegations made in that petition and was lateron discharged on unqualified apology having been tendered by the respondents therein. 4. I also note that Cr.OPC No. 2 of 2006 titled as Court on its own Motion versus B.R. Sharma was initiated against the counsel as also against Shri R.N. Tyagi on the allegations made in that petition and was lateron discharged on unqualified apology having been tendered by the respondents therein. It is also undisputed before me that the execution of the sentence in Criminal Revision No.52 of 2005 titled I.D. Packings and another versus M/S Ruchira papers and another was stayed on the conditions that Shri R.N. Tyagi would deposit Rs.3,20,385/- vide order dated 4.7.2006, the Hon’ble V.K. Gupta (C.J.) directed: “ Through the medium of this application, the petitioner seeks the recalling of the order dated 21st May, 2006 passed by this Court, suspension of the sentence imposed by the learned trail Court and under challenge in Criminal Revision No.52 of 2005 and for release of the petitioner from custody. The petitioner is brought in the Court today in custody. Mr. Virender Thakur, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has handed over to me a Demand Draft No.417394 dated 24th June, 2006 for Rs. 3,20,385/- drawn in favour of the Registrar General of this Court on Punjab National Bank, Jgadhri payable at Shimla. The demand Draft is accepted. The Registry may deposit the same in its account. For the reasons stated, the application is allowed. Order dated 21st May, 2006 is recalled. Because of the deposit of Rs.3,20,385/- through the aforesaid Demand Draft and in view of the first order dated 3rd May, 2005 passed in Criminal Revision No.52 of 2005, this application is allowed. The applicant is directed to be released from custody forthwith.” 5. When these petition/appeal/revision were taken up today, Shri R.N. Tyagi, who is present in Court along with his counsel S/Shri Rampal Tyagi and Ashok Tyagi expressed his desire to put an end to the entire controversy on the condition that the amount deposited by him in this Court by demand draft pursuant to the orders passed in the Criminal Revision (supra) along with interest be paid to M/s Ruchira Papers in full satisfaction of all their claims, subject matter of criminal appeal No. 752 of 2002, CMPMO No.305 of 2012 and in Civil Suit No.47/1 of 2005/01, titled as M/s Ruchira Papers versus M/s I.D. Packings, decreed on 23.9.2005. Statement of Shri R.N. Tyagi, who is present in Court, to this effect has been recorded separately, which statement has been accepted by Shri Sanjeev Sood, learned counsel on behalf of M/s Ruchira Papers. 6. In these circumstances, all three cases are being disposed of with the following directions: (a). Criminal Appeal No.752 of 2002, titled M/s Ruchira Papers Ltd. versus M/s I.D. Packings and another is disposed of as not pressed. (b) Criminal Revision No. 52 of 2005, titled M/s I.D.Packings and another versus M/s Ruchira Papers and another is disposed of with the directions that the amount lying deposited in FDR A/c No.042704PR00001121 dated 11.9.2012 along with interest satisfies the entire claim of the respondents M/S Ruchira Papers subject matter of the revision. (c). CMPMO No. 305 of 2012, titled R.N. Tyagi and another versus M/s Ruchira Papers ltd. is also disposed of with this direction that the decree passed in Civil Suit No. 47/1 of 2005/01, titled M/s Ruchira Papers versus M/s I.D. packing shall stand fully satisfied on the FDR along with interest having been paid to respondents M/s Ruchira Papers Limited. (d). The registry is directed to remit the amount of aforesaid FDR account along with interest accrued thereon to the bank account of M/s Ruchira Papers Limited for which purpose they shall submit the photo copy of their current account to the Registry. 7. All miscellaneous applications stand disposed of.