SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2007 Supreme(AP) 298

G.YETHIRAJULU
Arvind Srimal – Appellant
Versus
State Of A. P. – Respondent


O R D E R

The petitioners are A-2 and A-3 in Crime No.322 of 2006 of Ramgopal Police Station, Secunderabad, registered for the offences under Sections 464, 468, 471, 420, 506 and 120-B read with 34 of IPC.

2. It is alleged in the complaint that the defacto complainant, A-1 and others are partners of a firm. They purchased one property admeasuring 908.33 square yards under a registered sale deed dated 27-01-1990. On 10-11-1981 they executed a power of attorney in favour of the first accused to enter into an agreement to receive the sale consideration and to execute a sale deed in favour of third parties. Subsequently, on 25-02-1993 the GPA was cancelled by executing a revocation deed and a copy of the cancellation deed was sent to A-1 and he received the same through an acknowledgement. A-1 seized to be the GPA holder of the complainant and other partners. Some time prior to the filing of the complaint, they came to know that the first accused sold the above property to the petitioners under a registered sale deed, dated 29-12-2005 for a sale consideration of Rs.80,00,000/-. The first accused, by representing that he is the GPA, has executed the sale deed in favour of the petitioners















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top