Badar Durrez Ahmed, J.

1. The question which arises for consideration, at the outset, is whether this Letters Patent Appeal is maintainable or not. The appeal is directed against the order dated 10.09.2010 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in Crl. M. A No. 13306/2010, whereby the learned Single Judge rejected the application filed by the appellant/plaintiff under Section 340 read with Section 195(b)(i) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for setting the criminal law into motion against the respondent No.1/defendant No.1 and any other person/persons for having committed the offences referred to in Section 195(b)(i) Cr. P.C.

2. Some facts would be necessary for us to determine the question of maintainability of this appeal and they are as follows. The plaintiff had filed CS(OS) 809/2010 seeking specific performance of a contract dated 26.05.2007 executed by and between the appellant/plaintiff and the defendant No.1/respondent No.1. It is the case of the appellant that the respondent No.1 had filed a written statement wherein he had stated that he had sold the suit property bearing No. 284, Satya Niketan, Moti Bagh, New Delhi to one Pushpa Mittal by an alleged