JUDGMENT :- Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

2. Petitioner and his wife are the owners of the plot of land situated at Jaipur. On 24-4-2006 an agreement was entered into between the respondent No.11complainant on one hand and the petitioner and his wife on the other. As per that agreement, the petitioner had given development rights over the said land to the respondent/complainant for a consideration of Rs. 2.5 crs. Out of the consideration amount, respondent had made a payment of Rs. 35,01,000/-. The certain terms of the contract could not be fulfil1ed and the agreement was cancelled. As to who was responsible for the noncompliance of the terms of the contract is not relevant for the purpose of deciding this matter. As the agreement was cancelled, accused/petitioner issued a cheque of Rs. 35,01,000/- in favour of the respondent/complainant. Cheque was deposited with the complainant' banker at Juhu Branch, Mumbai. The cheque was dishonoured and thereafter notice was issued by the respondent to the petitioner from Mumbai. In spite of service of notice, payment was not made within the stipulated period, therefore the respondent filed a c

Click Here to Read the rest of this document