2018 (4) TMI 915

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... XXXVII CPC. 2. The plaintiffs' case is that their father late G.L. Tandon had three demat accounts with M/s Alankit Assignment Ltd. On the representation of the defendant to open demat account with M/s Apollo Sindhoori Capital Investments Ltd. with which he was a registered sub-broker, on 27.04.2005 G.L.Tandon opened three demat account therein. It is averred that while transferring the share portfolio from M/s Alankit Assignment Ltd. to M/s Apollo Sindhoori Capital Investments Ltd., the defendant wrongfully transferred 90% of the shares in his account and in the account of his wife Sapna Sehgal during the period between 2003 to 2008. The defendant did not give consideration and misappropriated the shares. It is further averred that the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....,62,760/- to the plaintiffs i.e. Rs. 2,81,25,000/- towards principal and Rs. 85,37,760/- towards interest till 31.03.2017. 4. The defendant on appearance filed application for leave to defend. It was averred that the plaintiffs were guilty of suppressing material facts; they did not mention the factum of cancellation of defendant's bail on 19.09.2014. After the cancellation of the bail and arrest of the defendant in the criminal case, the MOU executed between the parties became null and void and had no effect. The plaintiffs were not party to the MOU. Moreover, it was specifically recorded in Clause 10 of the MOU that no party would file any civil or criminal case against the other in any court of law in future. The plaintiffs have not fur....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of the said settlement, application for cancellation of bail was filed. It was, however, dismissed with the direction to the defendant to comply with the terms and conditions of the settlement within two months as requested by him. It did not have any impact on the defendant. Second application for cancellation of bail was filed on 17.07.2014 and by an order dated 19.09.2014 the conditional bail was cancelled and the defendant was arrested. After the filing of the charge-sheet in the court, the defendant has been granted regular bail without any condition. 8. On perusal of the contents of the MOU executed before the court whereby the defendant was granted conditional bail, the defendant had admitted his liability to pay of Rs. 4.0 crores.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tion of bail for violation of terms and conditions of MOUs. Learned Additional Sessions Judge committed no error in cancelling the conditional bail due to non-compliance of terms and conditions of MOU. The MOU did not debar the plaintiffs to avail civil remedies to recover the said amount. Settled position of law is that the criminal and civil proceedings are two different and separate independent remedies. Filing of the FIR and even of the proceedings under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act did not debar the plaintiffs to avail the civil remedy to recover the outstanding amount. The defendant's arrest pursuant to the cancellation of bail did not absolve him of the liability to pay the outstanding dues. 10. On perusal of the applicati....