1. The challenge in these petitions is to the orders dated 18th February 2013 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate (‘MM’) in Complaint Case Nos. 2207/1/07; 2208/1; 417/1; 2175A/1; 2190/1 and 2175/1, filed by the Petitioner/Complainant Icon Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. (‘IBPL’) against Agarwal Developers Pvt. Ltd. (‘ADPL’) and its Directors who were arrayed as Accused Nos. 2, 3 and 4 in the complaints.

2. The facts leading to the filing of the present petitions is that on 30th December 2006, IBPL entered into an agreement to sell in respect of land admeasuring 24 bighas 12 biswas situated in village Khaira, Tehsil Najafgarh, New Delhi with the owners of the said land. On 2nd January 2007, IBPL entered into two further separate agreements to sell in respect of land measuring 10 bighas and 14 biswas and 45 bighas and 4 biswas respectively situated in the same village with the respective land owners. The total sale consideration was Rs.1.15 crores per acre. IBPL paid Rs.1,92,92,500 to the owners as part consideration. According to IBPL, ADPL offered to purchase the rights of IBPL under the aforementioned three agreements with a profit of Rs.10 lakhs per acre. Accordingly, an agreement dated 24th February 2007 was entered into between IBPL and ADPL whereby all rights of IBPL under the three agreements to sell were transferred to ADPL.

3. It is stated that ADPL handed over the following six cheques dated 24th February 2007 to IBPL towards the payment of the consideration under the aforementioned agreements:

Sl. No. Cheque No. Amount

01. 520572 1,08,31,500/-

02. 520573 51,21,530/-

03. 520574 22,29,167/-

04. 520575 94,16,667/-

05. 520599 58,98,000/-

06. 520600 25,63,000/-

4. The aforementioned six cheques were dishonoured and complaints were filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (‘NI Act’) which were dismissed by six separate impugned orders of the same date. Accordingly the present petitions have been filed seeking leave to appeal against the said judgments.

5. According to IBPL, ADPL had assured that the cheques when presented for payment will be honoured. IBPL states that when it first presented the cheques for payment, they were returned on 1st March 2007 with the remarks “effects not yet cleared, please present again”. When IBPL again presented the cheques, they were returned on 8th March 2007 with the remarks „funds insufficient’. When the cheques were presented for payment on 29th March 2007 for the third time, they were returned dishonoured with the remarks ‘payments stopped by the drawer’.

6. The last dishonour of the cheques led IBPL to issuea legal notice dated 20th April 2007 thereby initiating the proceedings under Section 138 NI Act. When no payment was forthcoming the complaints were filed in June 2007.

7. On behalf of IBPL, Mr. G.N. Bashista, an authorized representative was examined as CW-1. Mr. Parvesh Garg, an officer of the Punjab National Bank, in which the account of IBPL was maintained, was examined as CW-2. Mr. R.K. Saini, Junior Technical Assistant in the office of Registrar of Companies (‘ROC’) was examined as CW-3. Mr. Vipin Kumar Singh, an officer of the ICICI Bank on which the impugned cheques were drawn and with whom ADPL’s account was maintained was examined as CW-4.

8. When the incriminating evidence was put to the Respondents under Section 313 Cr PC, they denied the allegations. On behalf of the Respondents, Mr. Rajiv Kumar Pandey, who was working as an Accountant with ADPL was examined as DW-1. Mr. Sarjit Singh, Patwari from Tehsil Najafgarh, South West District, New Delhi, was examined as DW-2. He brought the records of the property in question and proved that an order had been passed by the SDM requiring status quo to be maintained and that the said status quo was in force. Mr. Nitin Kumar, Junior Judicial Assistant of this Court was examined as DW-3. He placed on record the order sheets in CS (OS) No. 416 of 2007. He confirmed that the said suit has been filed on 2nd March