Sarash Kumar Sadh & Ors Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi

TO BE FILLED ,BY HAND KINDLY FILE ADDL MEMO OF PARTIES I I LISTING PROFORMA I Page 1
INSTRUCTIONS: 1. DO NOT°WRITE OUT SIDE THE BOXES 3. ONE CHARACTER "IN EACH BOX.
2. WRITE IN BLOCK CAPITAL LETTERS. 4. DO NOT Staple the Sheet.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI I

Case Type Number Year
JN THE MATTER OF :w
lcltzk-1 IMltl 1I I I I I oF 1~1°~bf
.......... . .,-,~I
NAM~ lslAIRIAk.lHI l1<lu.lMlekl l.s IAlblHI ~lwl.nl le lrzlsl PLA1NTIFF /

PETITIONER
· Versus
DEFENDANT/
RESPONDENT
1 (a) Case Cate.gory CRL

(b} Case Category
11111~rn
2 Date of Impugned or-der [IQ] I ~ 1,.......,...1~.1()-,--li""T"'"'""'1l2.
2 (a) Case Type /Number

l IIl II i I I J OF jII]I
I Il III IIl I OF I I I I I
3 Similar Matter
Case Type / Number
4 Statute Involved III I I I I I I·1 I I I l IIIIIIII

III IIIl IIIIII I· I I I I I I I I
Criminal Matters - ~ode 100 to 105
FIR No
I I 1~1° II ~ I
18 le I
FIR Date '. m @JiJ l~lc>lt11:1I
Police Station IG1c1h1 lslolajrl HI I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
Service Matters - Code 500 to 505
Department I Authority/ I I I I I I I I 1·I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
Organi~ation etc I I I I I I I I 1-' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
Motors Accident Claim Matters - Code 600
Insurance Company I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I- I I I
l I ·I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
12~ J_,~ PJ~
~ IJ.,,I( gm~ J
Lawyers Code IIlIj IIIj I
/)~
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL M.C. NO. OF2022
IN THE MATTER OF:

SARASH KUMAR SADH AND ORS. . .. PETITIONER'S
VERSUS
GOVT.OF NCT OF DELHI ... RESPONDENT
MASTER INDEX
S. No. CONTENT Pg. No.
- ·-
Listing Perfonna
1. Notice of Motion 1
2. Urgent Application 2
-,
.:>. Memo of Parties 3-4
4. List of Dates & Events 5 - 11
5. Petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 read with Article 226 of the Constitution 12 - 44
of India to Consider previous investigation conducted in

FIR No. 80/2014 PS- EOW by the Respondent null and
void and direct the Respondent to conduct 'Fresh/De
Novo Investigation' along with affidavit.
6. Annexure-A
45 - 62
Copies of the brochures, maps and other materials
showing visual presentation of the proposed building
layout, photos of atrium, escalators, and waterfall.
7. Annexure-B
63
A copy of order dated 14.12.2011 on 156(3) complaint
filed by Ms. Rachana Arora, passed by Ld. ACMM,
South.
8. Annexure-C 64 - 96
A True Copy of FIR No. 245/2011 PS- EOW.
9. I Annexurc - D l
A True Copy of the order dated, 29.08.2013 passed by the I 97 - 100
Hon·ble Delhi High Court in quashing proceedings
related to FIR No. 245/2011.
10. Anncxure-E
101 - 141
A copy of the closure report filed by the Investigating
officer in FIR No. 245/2011
11. Anncxure-F
142
A True Copy of the order dated 20.03.2014 passed by Ld.
CMM, South in FIR No. 245/2011
12. Annexure - G (Colly)
A True Copy of the order passed by Ld. CMM on 143-157
09.07.2014 in complaint u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C filed by
petitioners and A copy of FIR NO. 80/2014 registered by
the SHO m respect of the complaint filed by the
petitioners.
13. Annexure-H
A copy of the order dated 07.08.2014 passed by the Ld.
158
CMM wherein he has clubbed CC no. 77/1/C with FIR
NO. 80/2014.
14. Annexurc-1
A True Copy of the closure repm1 filed by the 159 - 192
Investigating Officer Aditya Ranjan on 29.01.2016 in FIR
No. 80/2014.
15. Annexure-J
193 - 210
A True Copy of the Protest Petition filed by Petitioners
011 04.05.2016.
16. Annexure - K (Colly)
211 - 213
A True Copy of the order dated 25.05.2016 and
30.05.2016 passed by Ld. CMM, South.
17. Anncxure-L
A True Copy of the order dated 24.06.2016 passed by Ld. 214
CMM, South.
18. Annexure - r"i (Colly)
215 - 224
A True Copy of the order sheet in FIR No. 80/2014 from 1
2016-2020.
-- -
I 9. Annexure-N
A True Copy of the order dated 27.09.2019 passed by Ld. 225
ACMivt South.
20. Annexure-0
A True Copy of Order dated 26.10.2021 passed by 226 - 227
Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in Crl.M.C. No. 6091/2019.
21. Annexure - P (Colly)
A True Copy of the application u/s 173(8) filed by 228 - 247
petitioners before the Ld. ACMM and a true Copy of the
order dated 28.02.2022 passed by Ld. CMM, South.
22. Annexure-Q
A True Copy of order dated I 0.03.2022 passed by Ms. 248 - 268
Charu Gupta, Ld. CMM, south whereby the Hon'ble
Judge discharged the company and its officials in terms of
Section 293 Cr.P.C.
23. Annexure-R
A True Copy of Order dated 12.04.2022 ofHon'ble High 269 - 270
Court of Delhi in Crl. M.C No. 6091/2019
'
24. Application Under Section 482 Cr.P.C Seeking

271 - 276
Exemption from filling typed copies of Dim Annexures,
along with Affidavit.
25. V AK.ALATNAMA 277 - 282
26. Court Fees 283
27. Proof of Service 284
PETITIONER'S
NEW DELHI
DATEj911.2022 /J~
(H.S. Bhullar, Sarabjeet Kaur, Harshvardhan
Indronil Mohan, Gulnaz Khan, Lalima Gosh,
Puja Singha Roy Advs.)
Bhullar Law Firm
1

CRIMINAL M.C NO. OF2022
IN THE MATTER OF:

SARASH KUMAR SADH AND ORS. ...PETITIONER'S
VERSUS
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI ... RESPONDENT
NOTICE OF MOTION
To
The Standing Counsel
State (Govt. of NCT Delhi)
Chamber No.
High Comt of Delhi
New Delhi.
Sir,
TAKE NOTICE that the accompanying Criminal Misc Petition shall be listed on
jO .2022 at 10:30 A.M. or any other dates soon thereafter as may be convenient to the
Hon 'ble Comt.
All parties have been served.
PETITIONERS
THROUGH
NEW DELHI
/J n ·£
DATE~~l 1.2022 µ ~
lndronil Mohan, Gulnaz Khan, Lalima Gosh,
B!tullar Law Firm
E-69, Greater Kailash Enclave-I,
New Delhi-I 10048
2
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHi

CRIMINAL M.C NO. OF 2022
IN THE MATTER OF:

SARASH KUMAR SADH AND ORS. . .. PETITIONER'S
VERSUS
URGENT APPLICATION
To
The Registrar General,
Delhi High Court,
New Delhi
Sir
Kindly list the accompanying Petition on ~ .2022 at 10:30 A.M. or any other
date thereafter as per the convenience of the Hon'ble Court. The grounds of urgency
are detailed in the accompanying Application.
PETITIONERS
THROUGH ~~ ~,e
NEW DELHI
DATEi2jl 1.2022
p~
(H.S. Bhullar, Sarabjcet Kaur, Harshvardhan
Bhullar Law Firm
E-69, Greater Kailash Enclave-I,
New Delhi-110048
3
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NE\V DELHI

CRIMINAL M.C NO. OF2022
IN THE MATTER OF:

SAR.ASH KUMAR SADH AND ORS. . .. PETITIONER'S
VERSUS
MEMO OF PARTIES
1. Mr. Sarash Kumar Sadh
S/o Late Shri Hira Lal
Rio 71, Kailash Hills
East ofKailash, New Delhi
2. Mr. Ashish Kumar Sadh

S/o Late Shri HiraLal
Rio Villa No E- 119, St. 3/4
Jaypee Greens, Greater Noida, UP
3. Mr. Virpal Singh

S/o Late Shri Narayan Singh
Residing at C- 702, Kaveri Aprutments
Alakhnanda, New Delhi- 110019
4. Mrs. Reena Singh

W /o Shri Virpal Singh
Residing at C- 702, Kaveri Apartments
5. Mr. Sanjay Bhargav

S/O Sh. D.K. Bhargava
R/O M-38, Saket, New Delhi
6. Mrs. Radha Bhargav

W/O Sh. Sanjay Bhargav
RIO M-38, Saket, New Delhi
... PETIT! ONER'S
VERSUS
State (Govt. OfNCT of Delhi)
4
Standing Counsel (Criminal)

Chamber No. - - -
High Cour1 of Delhi
New Delhi ... RESPONDENT
PETITIONER'S
THROUGH
NEW DELHI 0 ~ ·,e
DATE~11 l .2022 p~
(H.S. Bhullar, Sarabjcet Kaur, Harshvardhan
Blzullar Law Ffrm
E-69, Greater Kail ash Enclave-I,
New Delhi-I 10048
5

CRIMINAL M.(' NO. OF 2022
IN THE MATTER OF:

SARASH KUMAR SADH AND ORS. ...PETITIONER'S
VERSUS
LIST OF DATES
DATES PARTICULARS
October- The company through its directors, employees, and officials published
November their advertisements in national newspaper and on internet about their
2006 project titled as
"EROS BOULEVARD"(hereinafter referred to as the Project) and
fjirther issued brochures. ma12.s along with other material showing visual
re12.resentation o[_ the 12.ro{2_osed building lay_out. 12.hotos o[_ atrium.
escalators. and water[.all. In the brochures issued by_ the com12.a11J!.. theJ!.. had
mentioned that "The Vision is 5- star ... so is the fitture o[.retail."
The company made the public believe that it would be a co-existent
structure of Twin Hotels with big waterfalls in between with the state of
class in looks and ambiance, as existing in Dubai and further represented
that the shops would be having high prospective value due to its assured
completion before the opening of the XIX Commonwealth Games, 2010
i.e before 03.10.2010.
2006-2007 All the Petitioner's in this Petition booked shops in the above-mentioned
project and invested huge amount of their hard earned monies.
16.05.2011 On 16.05.2011 first complaint against this project was filed by Ms. Rachna
Arora. She filed a complaint against the company in the office of Joint
CP/EOW vide C.No. 1272/SO/JOINT CP which was received on
19.05.2011. In this complaint Ms. Rachna Arora has alleged that the
company has committed offences under section 406, 407, 415, 420, 467,
6
I
468. 4 71, 109, 120 B and 34 IPC.
I
I
Ms. Rachna Arora being aggrieved hy the non-acceptance of her I
I
• I
complaint in EOW filed a complaint uls 156(3) Cr. P.C 1973 m Ld. I
i
ACMM, South.
14.12.2011 Vide order dated 14.12.201 I Ld. ACMM Rakesh Pandit directed SHOPS-
EOW to investigate the complaint filed by Ms. Raclma Arora after iodging
an FIR under sections 406, 407, 415, 420, 467, 468, 471, 109, 120 Band
34 IPC.
16.12.2011 FIR bearing no. 245/2011 was registered under sections
406,407,415,420.467,468,471,109,120 Band 34 IPC at PS- EOW.
29.08.2013 That the company approached the Hon'ble Delhi High Court for quashing
of the said FIR bearing no. 245/2011. The Hon'ble High Court vide order
dated 29.08.2013 quashed the FIR no. 245/2011 PS-EOW in view of the
settlement arrived between Ms. Rach.na Arora and the company. The
Hon'ble Court didn't go into the merits of the case and the FIR was
quashed on the grounds of settlement between the parties.
"It is clarifl.ed that quashing o[.this FIR shall not in any_ manner a[fgct the
case o[. anv other comgfainants 12.ending with the 12.olice and the police
shall be at libertv to take a12.12.ro12.riate action in accordance with the law. "
That the Hon'ble High Com1 had categorically held that the quashing of
this FIR will not in any manner affect the cases of any other complainants
and the police will be at liberty to take appropriate action.
16.09.2013 IO in FIR no.245/2011, Mr. Nirmal Kumar Jha filed a closure report in this
FIR. This FIR had already been quashed by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court
vide order dated 29.08.2013. The IO filed this closure rep011 despite being
aware of the fact that the Hon'ble Delhi High Court had quashed the said
FIR because the pa11ies had arrived at the settlement and the Hon 'ble
Com1 had categorically held in its order that the quashing of this FIR shall
not in any manner affect the case of other complainants.
This closure report filed by IO was inherent illegal in nature as the FIR
was already guashed by Hon 'ble High Court and this whole illegal act was
done by IO in connivance comganv officials so that this closure regort can
hel:g them in groceedings in different FIR's.
7
i2J.12.2013 After becoming aware of the FlR No. 245/ 20 i 1 and the settlement which
the company reached with Ms. Rachna Arora to protect itself from the
I
clutches of criminal justice system, Petitioner No. 3 & 4 in the present case
filed a complaint against the company in the office of DCP-EOW Cell vide
diary no. D-8517 in reference to cheating and fraud perpetrated by the
I company on the Petitioners.
15.01.2014 After no action was taken on the complainant filed by Petitioner No. 3 & 4
the Petitioner No. 3 & 4 filed a complaint before the Ld. CMM, Saket.
This complaint was accompanied with an application u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C for
registering of FIR under the relevant provisions.
20.03.2014 An order was passed by the Ld. CMM (South), Saket in FIR no. 245/2011,
whereby the Ld. CMM pointed to the fact that the IO had failed to explain
how the cancellation/closure report was filed in FIR No. 245/2011 as the
same was quashed by the I Ion 'ble Delhi High Comt vide order dated
29.08.2013. The Ld. CMM also mentioned that the Investigating Officer
committed grave in-egularity in the filing of the cancellation/closure report
when no FIR and consequent criminal proceedings were in existence.
-09.07.2014 That against the complaint u/s 156(3) Cr. P.C filed by the Petitioner No. 3
& 4, Ld. CMM South vide order dated 09.07.2014 held, that a has been
filed which says that the allegations mentioned in this complaint are
similar to FIR no. 245/2011 PS-EOW in which cancellation report was
filed after quashing of proceedings by the Hon'ble High Court.
28.07.2014 SHOPS- EOW was directed by Ld. CMM, South to register an FIR on the
basis of the complaint of Petitioners and the same was registered on
28.07.2014 u/s 406,407,415,420,467,468,471,109,120B and 34 ofIPC.
30.07.2014 Petitioner No. 1 & 2 filed a complaint before the Ld. CMM, Saket for
registration of an FIR for the offences committed u/s 420,406,407 r/w
Section 415,420,467,468,471 and under Section 109,120B and 34 of IPC.
This complaint was accompanied with an application u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C for
registering of FIR under the relevant provisions.
07.08.2014 Vide order dated 07.08.2014 Ld. CMM South clubbed CC. no 77/1/C titled
Sarash Kumar Sadh & Ors with FIR no. 80/2014 PS-EOW as the same was
being investigated by the same IO.
8
,
113. l l.2 0 14 Petitioner No. 5 & 6 fileu a complaint before the Ld. CMM. Saket for
registration of an FIR for the often~es committed u/s 420,406,407 r/w
Section 415,420A67,468,471 and under Section 109,120B and 34 of IPC.
This complaint was accompanied with an appiication u/s 156(3} Cr.P.C for
registering of FIR under the relevant provision::;. I
2014-2015 The Investigating Officer Nirmal Kumar Jha was substituted by the
investigating Officer Aditya Ranjan for further investigation in FIR no.
80/2014.
29.01.2016 Canceliation report was filed by the Investigating Officer Aditya Ranjan in
the FIR no. 80/2014. This cancellation report was filed on the ground of
"civil matter" and the previously investigated case FIR no. 245/2011
against the same company with similar allegations. No cognizable offence
had been found against the company; therefore, this cancellation report
was filed.
It can be clearly seen how 11olice officials are using an illegally filed
closure reQort in FIR No. 245/2011 to file the closure re11ort in FIR No.
80/2014 and are simultaneously :grotecting the accused 11ersons from the
clutches of Criminal Justice System.
04.05.2016 A protest petition was filed by the Petitioners against the final/closure
report filed by the Investigating Officer for the cancellation of FIR no.
80/2014 dated 28.07.2014.
25.05.2016 Vide order dated 25.05.2016 Ld. CMM Saket acknowledged the corrupt
practices taken up by the Investigating Officer who was hand in glove with
the accused persons and was trying to save the accused persons from
criminal trial.
"On 24.05.2016. inseector Nirmal Kumar Jha. Securitv a1wroached Naib
Court HC Rakesh Kumar in lunch time seeking ae.12.ointment with the court.
Another Naib Court HC Ishwar Pal infgrmed undersigned regarding
Jns12.ector Nirmal Kumar Jha wanting to meel him in chamber. On inc[uiry_,
HC lshwar Pal infgrmed undersigned that Jns12.ector Nirmal Kumar Jha is
submitting that he knows this court. bu/ cow·/ did not remember anv
o[ficials o[_ the said name. However. Inseector Nirmal Kumar Jha was
eermitted to meet. Inspector Nirmal Kumar Jha came into chamber o{_the
9
I y}1dersigned and tohl that he wants to sav something. On seeing him.

undersigned recollected that Inspector Nirmal Kumar .Iha used to ai2_{2_ear
be{gre undersigned in some mal/er in K..arkadouma Court. lns12.ector
Nirmal Kumar Jha submil!ed that he has remained IlvVESTIGATING
OFFICER. o[.F!R 8012014 EOW hul that matter was later on investigated
bv. I 0. Ins12ector AdiO:!,a Ran[an. He submitted that he got in(prmation that
I· Ins'/2.ector AdiO:!,a Ran[an -.,11ho has fl.led cancellation reR,ort in the mailer
has taken mone)!. fj:om the 12ro12.osed accused in the matter in name o[.the
court. but that monev has not been rer given to this court ........ II
30.05.2016 That vide order dated 30.05.2016 Ld. MM, directed ACP L.C. Yadav,
Vigilance to file a report on behalf of CP in view of its earlier order dated
25.05.2016.
24.06.2016 A reply to the Protest petition was filed by the Investigating Officer Aditya
Ranjan in FIR No. 80/2014.
That vide order dated 24.06.2016 Ld. CMM transferred the matter to the
court of Sh. Sandeep Garg, Ld. ACMM.
2016-2020 That the Investigating Officer Aditya Ranjan in FIR No. 80/2014 never
appeared in the Court. The Ld. Court directed ACP vigilance to file a
report on behalf of CP in regard to corruption allegations against Aditya_
Ranjan by the old Investigating Officer Nirmal Kumar Jha. From the Ld.
Court order dated 09.06.2016, 24.06.2016, 30.06.2016, 15.11.2016,
29.04.2017, 08.11.2017, 04.01.2018, 27.03.2018, 05.03.2019, 27.03.2019,
20.04.2019, 30.11.2019, 01.02.2020 & 26.02.2020 it is evident that the
Investigating Officer Aditya Ranjan never appeared in the Court on these
dates in spite of being summoned by the Ld. Judge on several occasions.
Lastly on 26.02.2020 Shri. Ankit Singla Ld. ACMM, South issued BW
against Aditya Ranjan in the sum of Rs. 5000.
27.09.2019 The Ld. ACMM, South had to take up onsite visit u/s 310 Cr.P.C. as the
Investigating Officer was not helping the Hon 'ble Court to reach a valid
finding. The Investigating Officer in the present matter did not appear in
the Court after vigilance enquiry was ordered against him despite several
orders from the Hon 'ble Court in which he was directed to appear in the
Court and clear ce11ain doubts regarding the present matter. The Ld.
10
i ACMM, South after taking a sput \·isit 11/s 310 Cr. P.C observed in his i
[ order that the accused while constructing had changed the layout plan and I
Ithe arcade area had been shifted from the lobby level to the backside of the i
Ibuilding that too for about 8 to 10 skps below the lobby level. .
The Hon 'ble Comt also stated that there is enough material for taking
cognizance in the present matter.
-26.11.2019 That the company filed an application u/s 482 Cr. P.C bearing no. CRL.
MC. 6091/2019 in Hon'ble High Court of Delhi for setting aside the order
dated 27.09.2019 passed by Ld. ACMM, South.
18.03.2020 An application was filed by the Petitioners before Ld. ACMM, South,
Saket Comt seeking directions for further investigation/reinvestigation u/s
173(8) of Cr. P .C, 1973.
26.10.2021 That the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in Cr!. M.C. No. 6091/2019 passed
! an order dated 26.10.2021 whereby the Court held that, at the request of
the company, the Complainant should explore the possibility of an

amicable settlement.
28.02.2022 That vide order dated 28.02.2022 the Ld. CMM, South declined the
request of Petitioners for further investigation and dismissed all the three
applications of the petitioners.
10.03.2022 That vide order dated 10.03.2022 the Ld. CMM, South held that there does
not appear any reasons for presuming that the accused company EROS had
committed any offence and further held that the charges against the
accused and its directors appear to be groundless. Consequently, the
accused company and other accused persons were discharged in terms of
Section 239 Cr.P.C.
12.04.2022 That vide order dated 12.04.2022 in Cr!. M.C No. 6091/2019 the Hon'ble
High Comt of Delhi held that the company had already been discharged
vide order dated 10.03.2022 passed by Ld. ACMM, South and therefore
the Petition filed by the Complainants stands dismissed.
Tainted investigation was carried out and actual facts of the case was
supressed by both the IO's and their supervising officer to help the accused
persons procure a discharge order. On account these deficiencies Denovo/
11
r- Fresh InvestigaLion should be done after ~ant:ellation of investigation

1
I
I
CatTied out by both the 1o·s.
I Hence, the present petition praying for the same.

'--------'---
PETITIONER'S
THROUGH
~
NEW DELHI
OATE~!Jl 1.2022
Bhullar Law Firm
E-69, Greater Kai lash Enclave-I,
New Delhi-110048
12
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHi

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS .JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL M.C NO. OF 2022
IN THE MATTER OF:

1. Mr. Sarash Kumar Sadh
S/o Late Shri Hira Lal
Rio 71, Kailash Hills
East of Kai lash, New Delhi
2. Mr. Ashish Kumar Sadh

S/o Late Shri HiraLal
Rio Villa No E- 119, St. 3/4
Jaypee Greens. Greater Naida, UP
3. Mr. Virpal Singh

S/o Late Slu·i Narayan Singh
4. Mrs. Reena Singh

Wlo Shri Virpal Singh
5. Mr. Sanjay Bhargav

S/O Sh. D.K. Bhargava
6. Mrs. Radha Bhargav

WJO Sh. Sanjay Bhargav
... PETITIONER'S
VERSUS
State (Govt. OfNCT of Delhi)
Standing Counsel (Criminal)
Chamber No. - - -
High Court of Delhi
New Delhi ... RESPONDENT
13
PETITION UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL

PROCEDURE, 1973 READ WITH ARTICLE 22G OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF !NDIA HUMBLY PRAYING THAT THIS
HON'BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO ISSUE APPROPRIATE
ORDER(S) OR DIRECTION(S) TO: -
A. DIRECT RESPONDENT TO CONDUCT 'FRESH/DE NOVO

INVESTIGATION' AFTER CANCELLING THE PREVIOUS
INVESTIGATION HOLDING IT AS NULL AND VOID BECAUSE:
1. THE NATURE OF THE INVESTIGATION CARRIED OUT BY

THE INVESTIGATING OFFICERS MR. NIRMAL KUMAR
JHA AND MR. ADITYA RANJAN PS - EOW WAS CORRUPT,
MALAFIDE, TAINTED & BIASED AND WAS CONDUCTED
ILLEGALLY IN CONNIVANCE WITH THE ACCUSED
PERSONS.
2. IN ORDER TO HELP THE ACCUSED, NIL INVESTIGATION

WAS CONDUCTED IN FIR NO. 80/2014 AND A
MANIPULATED CANCELLATION REPORT WAS FILED
ILLEGALLY ON THE BASIS OF THE QUASHED FIR NO.
245/2011 BY FLOUTING THE ORDERS OF THIS HON'BLE
HIGH COURT VIDE ORDER DATED 29.08.2013.
3. NO ATTEMPTS WERE MADE TO COLLECT EVIDENCE, NO

CUSTODIAL INTERROGATION OF ACCUSED PERSONS
EVER TOOK PLACE AND THE INVESTIGATING OFFICERS
ALONG WITH THEIR SUPERVISING OFFICERS WERE
HAND IN GLOVE WITH THE ACCUSED PERSONS TO
EXTEND ILLEGAL BENEFITS TO THEM.
B. ISSUE/PASS ANY OTHER ORDER(S) OR DIRECTION(S) THAT

THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY DEEM FIT AND PROPER IN THE
FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE.
14
TO
THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND HIS COMPANION
JUSTICES OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI THE
HUMBLE PETITION OF THE PETITIONER ABOVE NAMED.
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:
1. The petitioner herein is filing the present petition inter-alia seeking the Hon'ble High
Court of Delhi to direct the respondent to conduct a fresh/de novo investigation after
cancelling the previous investigation conducted by PS - EOW in FIR No. 80/2014, by
holding it null and void, as the investigation carried out by IO's PS - EOW and their
supervising officer was corrupt, malafide, biased, tainted, was only done to dilute the
ca::;e and help the accused.
2. The brief facts of the present case are as followed: -
2.1.That around October-November 2006, the company through its directors,

employees, and officials published fake advertisements in the national
newspaper and on internet about its project titled "EROS BOULEVARD"
and fm1her issued brochures, maps and other material showing deceptive
visual presentation of the proposed building layout, photos of atrium,
escalators, and waterfall. In the brochures issued by the company they had
mentioned that "The Vision is 5- star... so is the future ofretail." The company
made the public believed that it would be a co-existent structure of Twin
Hotels with big wate1falls in between with the state of class in looks &
ambiance, as existing in Dubai and fu11her represented that the shops would be
having high prospective value due to its assured completion before the opening
of the XIX Conunonwealth Games, 2010 i.e before 03.10.2010.
The Copies of the brochures, maps and other material showing visual
presentation of the proposed building layout, photos of Atrium, Escalators and
waterfall is annexed hereto as Annexure - A.
15
2.2.That after seeing the various fake advertisements from the Company on
numerous public platforms regarding the project "EROS BOULEVARD"
and believing the representation made by the Directors of the company to
be true, the Petitioner~s booked shops in the said project. The Directors,
Managing Directors, Employees, and the agents of the company deceived and
thereby induced petitioners into booking a non-existent virtual shop at an
exorbitant rate of Rs. 26,000/- per sq. ft. through fake assurance of deceptive
virtual presentation on the basis of brochures, coloured anJ attractive site
plans, photos, and computer graphics. It was projected by the Company that
the shop was situf!ted in its upcoming mall-cum-Five-star hotels of Inter-
Continental (interconnected with Atrium, Waterfalls etc.) akin to Dubai
International Mall/Standards. That the petitioners considered the project to be
lucrative due to the high footfall of foreign visitors during the Commonwealth
Games, they booked a shop in the big lobby area on the main entrance.
2.3.That Ms. Rachna Arora one of the initial investors in the said prope11y filed a
complaint against the Company and its directors in the office of Joint CP/EOW
vide C No. 1272/SO/JOINT CP. This complaint filed by Ms. Rachana Arora
with Joint CP EOW was neither accepted by EOW nor any action was taken by
the police on this complaint. Being aggrieved by this lethargic behavior of the
police, Ms. Rachana Arora filed a complaint against the Company and its
directors under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C.
2.4.That the Ld. ACMM, South acting on the complaint filed by Ms. Raclma Arora
passed an order dated 14.12.2011, whereby he directed the SI-IO PS - EOW to
investigate the complaint filed by the complainant against the company and its
directors after lodging of FIR under the relevant sections. A copy of order
dated 14.12.2011 passed by Ld. ACMM, South is annexed herewith as
Annexure - B.
2.5.On the basis of the afore mentioned Order, SHO PS - EOW registered FIR
bearing No. 245/2011 against the Company and its directors under sections
406,407,415,420,467,468,471, 109, 120 Band 34 of IPC at PS- EOW on
16
16.12.2011. I\ True Copy of FIR No. 245/2011 PS- EOW is annexed and
marked hereto as Annexure - C.
2.6.The Company being aggrieved by this Order passed by, Ld. ACMM, South.
approached the Hon'ble Delhi High Com1 for quashing of FIR bearing no.
245/201 I PS - EOW. That the Hon'ble Delhi High Com1 vide order dated
29.08.2013 quashed the FIR No. 245/2011 in view of the settlement arrived
between Ms. Raclma Arora and the Company. The Hon'ble High Court while
passing this quashing order didn't go into the merits of the case and the FIR
was quashed only on the grounds of settlement between the parties. The
Hon'ble High Comt in its quashing order had clearly stated that this order
shouldn't hamper any new investigation or criminal proceedings against the
same company.
"It is clarified that quashing o(this FIR shall not in any manner affect lhe case
of any olher complaint pending with the police and the police shall be at
liberty to take appropriate action in accordance with the law. "
A True Copy of the order dated, 29.08.2013 passed by the Hon'ble Delhi High
Court in quashing proceedings related to FIR No. 245/2011 is annexed
herewith as Anncxure- D.
2.7.That the Hon'ble High Court observed in its order that the Company and its
directors settled their matter with 9 other investors/buyers by reimbursing their
amount with interest and the Hon'ble High Court also levied a cost of Rs.
4,00,000/ (Rupees Four Lac Only) for quashing the proceedings against the
petitioners (Directors of Company) in order to maintain the peace in the
society. It further transpired from the order that this quashing order shall not
affect the easels of any other investor/s or buyers.
2.8.That from the perusal of F.I.R. registered against the Company and the
Hon'ble High Court's Order dated 29.08.2013, we can notice that the company,
its officials and public servants committed several wrongs and to protect
17
themselves from the clutches for criminai justice system. Company reimbursed
the amount received with interest to its several investors.
2.9.That from the contents of FIR No. 245/2011, the Petitioners have come to
know that the Company. its directors, officials and associated persons have
further cheated the Government Department, firstly by getting allotment of
land by manipulating officials of D.D.A. and thereafter, by availing several
benefits under the beneficial schemes declared by the Government of India in
order to promote the XIX Commonwealth Gan1es, 2010 by fraudulently
showing the (incomplete} project as functional prior to Common Wealth
Games i.e. on 03.10.2011. This act of the Company was part of the major
conspiracy linked to the Common Wealth Scam since the date of having
allotment of two different plots and showing it combined project and Company
is a habitual offender of doing such offence in order to attract the investors and
collected money from the public at large and company and its representatives,
officials are the habitual offender and cheated the complaints in a pre-planned
manner.
2.10. After the quashing order was passed by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court
in FIR No. 245/2011 the Investigating Officer in the said FIR filed a closure
report on 13.09.2013. The Investigating Officer in FIR No. 245/2011 failed to
show how the cancellation report with respect of FIR No. 245/2011 was filed
even after the said FIR was quashed by Hon 'ble Delhi High Court.
By filing this Cancellation/closure report the Investigating Officer committed
grave irregularity. That when no FIR and consequent criminal proceedings
were in existence, the question of filing any report with respect to the same
does not arise. A copy of the closure report filed by the Investigating officer in
FIR No. 245/2011 is annexed herewith as Annexurc - E.
2.11. That the faitl1 of petitioners in the company disappeared when it failed
to anange tenants, failed to let out and pay assured rent qua Eros Boulevard,
which was assured to Petitioner's while obtaining their signatures on NOC.
Petitioner No. 3 & 4 being fed up with the tactics employed by the Company,
18
lodged a complaint before the E.O.W. Cell against the accused persons which
was duly acknowledged as received on 21.12.2013 vide D.D. No. D-8517.
2.12. That even after filing of Complaint against the Company in the office
of DCP-EOW Cell no action or investigations were caiTied out against the
company. Being aggrieved by the said inaction by DCP- EOW, Petitioners No.
3 & 4 on 15.01.2014 filed a complaint against the Company under section
156(3) Cr.P.C for offences committed under section 420,406,407 r/w section
415,420,467,471 and under section 109, 120 Band 34 ofIPC.
2.13. On 20.03.2014 Ld. CMM, South passed an order in FIR No.245/2011,

whereby the Ld. CMM had acknowledged the fact that Investigating Officer
had failed to explain how the cancellation/closure report was filed in FIR No.
245/2011 PS-EOW as the same FIR wns y_uashed by Hon'ble Delhi High Couit
vide order dated 29.08.2013. The Ld. CMM also mentioned that the
Investigating Officer committed irregularity m the filing of
cancellation/closure report when no FIR and consequent criminal proceedings
were in existence. A True Copy of the order dated 20.03.2014 passed by Ld.
CMM, South in FIR No. 245/2011 is annexed herewith as Annexure- F.
2.14. That against the complaint u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C filed by Petitioner No. 3
& 4 Ld. CMM South vide order dated 09.07.2014 held that the police report
was filed to the effect that the allegations mentioned in the complaint are
similar to FIR no. 245/2011 PS-EOW in which cancellation report was filed
after quashing of proceedings by the High Court. Further, it is noteworthy that
the quashing order was passed in FIR no 245/2011 PS-EOW, on the basis of
settlement between the patties and not on the basis of the merits of the case.
Accordingly, SHO PS- EOW was directed to register an FIR considering the
complaint filed by the petitioners is cognizable offence.
That in view of the order dated 09.07.2014 passed by the Ld. CMM South,
EOW registered FIR no. 80/2014 against the company u/s
406,407,415,420,467,468,471,109,120B and 34 ofIPC on 28.07.2014.
19
A True Copy of the order passed by Ld. CMM on 09.07.2014 in co111plaint u/s
156(3) Cr.P.C filed by petitioners and A copy of FIR NO. 80/2014 registered
by the SHO in respect or the complaint filed by the petitioners is annexed
herewith as Annexure- G (Colly).
2.15. That around November, 2014 the Petitioner No. 1, 2, 5 and 6 filed a
complaint before the Ld. C'MM, Saket. This complaint was filed u/s 190(1 )(c)
r/w Section 200 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 for the offences committed
u/s 420,406,407 r/w Section 4i5,420,467,468,471 and under Section 109,120B
and 34 ofIPC. This complaint was accompanied with an application u/s 156(3)
Cr.P.C for registering of FIR under the relevant provisions.
That vide order dated 07.08.2014 Ld. CMM South clubbed CC. no 77/1/C
titled Sarash Kumar Sadh & Ors with FIR no. 80/2014 PS-EOW as tl1e san1e
was being inve~tigated by the same Investigating Officer.
A copy of the order dated 07.08.2014 passed by the Ld. CMM wherein he has
clubbed CC no. 77/1/C with FIR NO. 80/2014 is annexed herewith as
Annexure - H.
2.16. That in 2014-2015 INVESTIGATING OFFICER Nirmal Kumar Jha

was substituted with INVESTIGATING OFFICER Aditya Ranjan to further
investigate FIR No. 80/2014 which was registered on tl1e basis of the
Complaint filed by the petitioners under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. That the new
INVESTIGATING OFFICER Aditya Ranjan on 29.01.2016 filed a
cancellation/ closure report in FIR No. 80/2014. The grounds relied upon by
the Investigating Officer for filing this cancellation report was that the dispute
between Petitioners and the company is civil in nature and the same has been
investigated previously in FIR No. 245/2011 against the same company with
similar allegations. The Investigating Officer in the cancellation report also
reached to conclusion that no cognizable offences have been committed by the
company, therefore this cancellation report is being filed in FIR No. 80/14. A
True Copy of the closure rep011 filed by the Investigating Officer Aditya
Ranjan on 29.01.2016 in FIR No. 80/2014 is annexed and marked hereto as
Annexure - I.
20
2.17 That petitioners would likt! io humbly submit here that the Closure
report filed by Investigating Officer Aditya Ranjan in FIR No. 80/2014 does
not disclose any material facts. Old IO, the IO who filed the closure report and
the ACP who was supervising them were hand in gloves with the company and
no effective investigations were ever carried out by them. In the present matter
the custodial inte1Togation of the directors, employees of the company were
required to unearth the evidence of fraud and cheating committed by the
accused company, but both the Investigating Officers and their supervising
officer carried out a tainted investigation since its inception when they filed the
closure report in FIR No. 245/2011 so that they can protect the company from
the clutches of criminal justice system.
That the concluding part of the cancellation repmt filed by IO Aditya Ranjan
shows the extent of l11e biasness cf the investig~tiun and the fact that the entire
investigation conducted was nothing but a fa;ade to shield the Accused
persons. The concluding part of the Cancellation Report is reproduced herein
below:
"During investigation it is also revealed that the Complaints of the

abovementioned Complaint was received in EOW and the same was closed on
the grounds of Civil Nature as well as the part ofpreviously investigated case
FIR No. 245/2011 against the same Company with similar allegation."
2.18. That the concluding remark by IO Aditya Ranjan brings to us a

collusive reflection of how the IO considers an FIR which stands quashed by
the Order ofHon'ble High Court of Delhi dated 29.08.2013 while conducting
its investigation in FIR No. 80/2014 when the Hon'ble High Court in its order
had categorically clarified that this quashing of FIR shall not in any manner
affect the case of any other complaint pending with police and the police shall
be at libe1ty to take appropriate action in accordance with the law.
2.19. Aggrieved by the fact that INVESTIGATING OFFICER Aditya

Ranjan filed a closure report in FIR No. 80/2014, Petitioners filed a protest
petition in the court of Ld. CMM South on 04.05.2016. It was alleged by
21
Petilioners in the protest petition that the closure rcpo11 has been filed in a
biased and callous manner without any application of mind. All the allegations
made in FIR have not been duly investigated, much evidence which was oral,
and documentary in nature has not been collected properly by 10 during
investigations and the IO. accused persons aiong with senior officers of EOW
have influenced the investigation. It was so alleged from petitioners that the IO
Aditya Ranjan has en-oneously bypassed the tenet of criminal jurisprudence. A
True Copy of the Protest Petition filed by Petitioners on 04.05.2016 is annexed
herewith as Annexure- J.
2.20. That vide order dated 25.05.2016 Ld. CMM Saket brings to our notice
the con-upt practices taken up by 10 Aditya Ranja.11 who was hand in glove
with accused persons and was trying to save the accused persons from criminal
trial
"On 24.05.2016, inspector Nirmal Kumar Jha, Security approached Naib

Court HC Rakesh Kumar in lunch time seeking appointment with the court.
Another Naib Court HC Ishwar Pal informed undersigned regarding Inspector
Nirmal Kumar Jha wanting to meet him in chamber. On inqui1y, HC Ishwar
Pal informed undersigned that Inspector Nirmal Kumar Jha is submitting that
he kno·ws this court, but court did not remember any officials of the said name.
However, Inspector Nirmal Kumar Jha was permitted to meet Inspector
Nirmal Kumar Jha came info chamber of the undersigned and told that he
·wants to say something on seeing him, undersigned recollected that Inspector
Nirmal Kumar Jha used to appear in some matter in Karkadooma Court.
Nirmal Kumar Jha submitted that he has remained INVESTIGATING
OFFICER. ofFIR 8012014 EOW, but that matter was later on investigated by.
I 0. Inspector Aditya Ranjan. He submitted that he got information that
Inspector Aditya Ranjan who has filed cancellation report in the matter has
taken moneyJi-om the proposed accused in the mauer in name of the court, but
11
that money has not yet given to this court ........
22
That vidc order dated 30.05.2016, the vigilance department was directed by the
Ld. Court to file a repo1t on behalf of the CP in view of the order dated
25.05.20!6 passed by Ld. CM:tvI South.
A True Copy of the order dated 25.05.2016 and 30.05.2016 passed by Ld.
CMM. South is annexed and marked hereto as Annexure - K (Colly).
2.21. The Investigating Officer Aditya Ranjan filed a reply to the protest
petition filed by the petitioners in FIR No. 80/20 I4. In the reply to protest
Petition the Investigating Officer Aditya Ranjan reaches to the conclusion that
the essential ingredients of misappropriation and embezzlement of money have
not been made out or substantiated. It was the Investigating Officer's view that
the proper investigation of the case was can-ied out on its merits without giving
ar.y favor to any party. No criminality against any of Lhe officials of the
company was established during the course of investigation and no evidence to
support allegation of criminal breach of trust, cheating or forgery of documents
was found during investigations.
That the Petitioners would like to humbly submit that all the findings reached
by the Investigating Officer Aditya Ranjan in the closure report and reply to
the protest petition filed by petitioners are untenable. No proper investigations
were ever carried out in FIR No. 80/2014 by the old Investigating Officer or
the new Investigating Officer. The old & new Investigating Officer. along with
the senior officers of EOW were always hand in gloves with the officials of the
company. The Investigating Officer Aditya Ranjan. the new Investigating
Officer filed a closure repo1t in FIR No. 80/2014 by taking into consideration
the closure rep01t filed in FIR No. 245/2011. The closure rep01t which was
filed FIR No. 245/2011 was in-egular and illegal because criminal proceedings
in regard to FIR No. 245/2011 had already been quashed by the Hon' ble Delhi
High Comt and the closure report was filed by the old Investigatine: Officer
Nirmal Kumar Jha in connivance with the accused persons so that they can be
protected from any future actions in any new FIR.
2.22. That the Ld. CMM South vide order dated 24.06.2016 transferred the
case to the comt of Sh. Sandeep Garg, Ld. ACMM South, in view of the order
23
dated 25.05.2016. whereby it had come to the notice of the Ld. CMM that IO
Aditya Kanjan has taken money from the officials of the company in the name
of the Ld. Court. That this allegation has huge implications on the integrity of
the Ld. Cfv1M, so this matter was transferred from the court of Ld. CMM to the
Com1 of Shri. Sandeep Garg, Ld. ACMM, South. A True Copy of the order
dated 24.06.2016 passed by Ld. CMM. South is annexed herewith as
Annexure - L.
2.23. IO Aditya Ranjan in FIR No. 80/2014 never appeared in Court after the
Ld. court directed ACP vigilance to file a rep01t on behalf of CP with regard to
the corruption allegations against Aditya Ranjan by the old IO in the Nirmal
Kumar Jha. From Ld. Court order dated 09.06.2016, 24.06.2016, 30.06.2016,
15.11.2016, 29.04.2017, 08.11.2017. 04.01.2018, 27.03.2018, 05.03.2019,
27.03.1019, 20.04.2019, 30.11.2019, 01.02.2020 & 26.02.7.020 it is evident
that IO Aditya Ranjan never appeared in Com1 on these dates even after he
was summoned by Ld. Judge on several occasions. Lastly on 26.02.2020 Shri.
Ankit Singla Ld. ACMM, South issued BW against Aditya Ranjan in the sum
ofRs. 5000.
A True Copy of the order sheet in FIR No. 80/2014 from 2016-2020 passed by
the Ld. ACMM, South is annexed herewith as Annexure - M (Colly).
2.24. The Ld. ACMM, South had to do a site visit u/s 310 Cr.P.C. as the
Investigating Officer was not helping the Hon'ble Court in airiving to a valid
findings. The Investigating Officer in the present matter wasn't appearing in
the Court after vigilance enquiry was ordered against him even after several
Orders from Hon'ble Court in which he was directed to appear in Court and
clear certain doubts regarding the present matter. The Ld. ACMM, South after
taking a spot visit u/s 310 Cr.P.C observed in his order that the company while
constructing the project have changed the layout plan and the arcade area have
been shifted from lobby level to the backside of the building that too for about
8 to IO steps below the lobby level. The Hon 'ble court also stated that there is
enough material for taking cognizance in the present matter.
24
A True Copy of ihe order dated 27.09.2019 pussed hy Ld. ACMM, South is
annexed herewith as Annexure - N.
2.25. That the Company being aggrieved by the order dated 27.09.2019
passed by Ld. ACMM, South filed an application u/s 482 Cr.P.C bearing no.
Crl. MC. 6091/2019 in Hon'ble High Court of Delhi for setting aside the order
passed by Ld. ACMM, South.
That th~ Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in Crl. M.C. No. 6091/2019 passed an
order dated 26.10.2021 whereby the court held that, at the request of the
company, the Complainant should explore the possibility of an amicable
settlement.
A True Copy of Order dated 26.10.2021 passed by Hon'ble High Court of

Delhi in Crl.M.C. No. 6091/2019 is annexed herewith as Annexure- 0.
2.26. That the petitioners moved an application u/s 173(8) Cr.PC seeking
directions for fu1ther investigation/reinvestigation under section 173(8) Cr.PC
along with three other applications seeking to place certain facts on records
and seeking further directions in Ld. ACMM, South Court.
On 28.02.2022, Ld. CMM South declined the request of Petitioners for further
investigation under section 173(8) Cr.P.C and dismissed the other 3
applications which were filed by Petitioners seeking to place certain facts on
record.
A True Copy of the application u/s 173(8) filed by petitioners before the Ld.
ACMM and a true Copy of the order dated 28.02.2022 passed by Ld. CMM,
South as Annexure - P (Colly).
2.27. On 10.03.2022 Ms. Charu Gupta, Ld. CMM, South passed an order on
charge whereby, she reached to the conclusion that there does not appear any
grounds for presuming that the company or any of its directors have committed
any offence. Further, the Court considers the charge against the company and
its directors to be groundless. Consequently, the company and its officials are
hereby discharged in terms of Section 293 Cr.P .C.
25
;\ True Copy of order dated I 0.03.2022 passed by Ms. Cham Gupta. Ld.
CMM, south whereby the Hon"ble Judge discharged the company and its
officials in terms of Section 293 Cr.P.C. is annexed herewith as Anne:rn!"c -
Q.
2.28. That the order on charge passed by Ms. Charu Gupta, Ld. CMM, South
was not wrong because there was nothing on record and the !O's had never
carried out any meaningful investigations in these FIR's. The canceliation
report filed in FIR No. 245/20 I I after the FIR was quashed by Hon 'ble High
Court of Delhi was only done so that EOW personals can manage other FIR's
filed against the company. This illegal filling of cancellation report in FIR No.
245/2011 reeks of malafide intent and corruption.
2.29. That the 10 in the case didn't carry out any investigation and this fact is
evident from order sheet from 2016-2020. IO Aditya Ranjan never appeared in
court from 2016-2020 and at last the Ld. ACMM, South had to issue a Bailable
Warrant in the sum of Rs. 5000/- to make IO Aditya Ranjan appear in court.
That from order dated 27.09.2019, we can see that IO wasn't assisting court so
the Ld. ACMM, South had to do a site visit under section 310 Cr. P.C. From
all the above mentioned facts it becomes evidently clear that the IO & their
supervising officer never canied out any investigation, nil investigation was
done by the IO and they were always hand in glove with the accused people so
that these accused persons can be protected from the clutches of criminal
justice system.
2.30. That vide order dated 12.04.2022 in Crl. M.C No. 6091/2019 the
Hon'ble High Court of Delhi held that the company had already been
discharged vide order dated 10.03.2022 passed by Ld. ACMM, South and
therefore the Petition filed by Company stands dismissed.
A True Copy of Order dated I 2.04.2022 of Hon 'ble High Court of Delhi in
Cr!. M.C No. 6091/2019 is annexed herewith as Annexure - R.
26
GROUNDS
CORRUPT, TAi!\ITED & BIASED iNVESTIGAT!ON WAS CONDUCTED: -
I. BECAUSE the Investigating officer is trying to give civil color to a matter
which is prin1a facie criminal in nature. The investigation conducted by the
Investigating officer is insufficient and biased in favor of the Company
because of its money power.
II. BECAUSE the IO's and their Supervising Officer knew about other
Complainants and they in connivance with the Accused Persons filed an
illegal closure report in FIR No. 245/201 I after 15 days of the said FIR being
quashed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, so as to protect the Accused
persons qua any actions arising out of different complaint filed by other
complainants.
III. BECAUSE the Investigating officer failed miserably to conduct free and fair
investigation and merely filed a Cancellation Report in FIR No. 80/2014 by
mischievously relying on an FIR which was quashed not on merits but on the
basis of the settlement and the Investigating officer further disregarded the
directions of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court that the settlement will not come
in the way of other complainants and other cases have to be investigated
separately.
IV. BECAUSE the Investigating Officer has deliberately and intentionally failed
to make public servants a party to the FIR No. 80/2014. As per contra the
public servants were a party in the previous FIR 245/20 IO on the basis of
which the Investigating Officer has filed a closure rep011 in FIR No. 80/2014.
This clearly shows that the Investigating Officer has failed to carry out
effective and fair investigation.
V. BECAUSE the similar allegations were labelled against the company in FIR
No. 245/2010 wherein the company had arrived at a settlement with the
complainants. It is evident from the settlement itself that the company had
committed fraud and cheating on the complainants which was brushed aside
by the Investigating officer while filing a closure report in FIR No. 80/20 I 4.
27
VL BECAUSE the closure report submitted by the Investigating officer is biased

and the contents thereof are fully di~tated by the accused directors of the
company so that they can be protected from the clutches of the criminal
justice system. For getting desired contents in the closure report filed by the
Investigating officer, the accused company along with its directors had used
bribes and other illegal methods for gratifying the concerned officers to
achieve their objectives.
Vll. BECAUSE the IO and their supervising officer had violated the provisions of
the law by not following the procedure as specified in Cr.P.C viz Section 161.
It is the duty of the Police to call the accused persons for recording of their
statement but in the present case a mere formality in the form of questioner
has been performed, as none of the employees and directors of the company
were called for recording of their statements, which itself shows that the
investigation wasn't conducted in an effective manner and both the Io's with
their supervising officer were hand in glove with accused persons.
VIII. BECAUSE the order dated 25.05.2016 passed by Ld. CMM, South raised the
curtain over c01Tupt practices deployed by the Investigating Officer and their
supervising officers to save the accused persons from the criminal justice
system. In an order dated 25.05.2016, Ld. CMM, South held that,
"On 24.05.2016, inspector Nirmal Kumar Jha, Security approached Naib

Court HC Rakesh Kumar in lunch time seeking appointment with the court.
Another Naib Court HC Ishwar Pal informed undersigned regarding
Inspector Nirmal Kumar Jha wanting to meet him in chamber. On inquily,
HC Ishwar Pal informed undersigned that Inspector Nirmal Kumar Jha is
submitting that he kno·ws this court, bUI court did not remember any officials
of the said name. However, Inspector Nirmal Kumar Jha was permiued to
meet. Inspector Nirmal Kumar Jha came into chamber of the undersigned
and told that he wants to say something. On seeing him, undersigned
recollected that Inspector Nirmal Kumar Jha used to appear before
undersigned in some matter in Karkadooma Court. Inspector Nirmal Kumar
Jha submitted that he has remained INVESTIGATING OFFICER. of FIR
80/2014 EOM~ but that ma/ler was later on investigated by. I 0. Inspector
28
Aditya Rw1jan. He submitled that he got i:iformwion that Inspector Adirya

Ranjan who hos .filed cancellation report in the nwlier has taken money Ji·om
the proposed occm·ed in the malter in name of the courl, bu/ Lhat money has
11
not been yet given to this court ...
NIL INVESTIGATION vVAS CARt"'UED OUT BOTH THE IO'S: -

I. BECAUSE in the closure report filed by the IO in FIR NO. 245/2011 nothing
substantial is mentioned about changed plan structure of the project, which is
the basis of the complainant of the Petitioner. This manifests that nil or no
investigation was conducted by both the IO's.
II. BECAUSE the Ld. ACMM, South in its order dated 10.05.2019 arrived at the
finding that the shops were not exactly at the lobby level and the shopping
area is about I. 75 meters below the lobby level. Moreover, the access to the
shopping area had been changed at the time of the final construction. The
Investigating officer didn't provide any kind of evidence for Ld. ACMM to
reach this conclusion and the Ld. ACMM had to undertake a site visit u/s 310
Cr. P.C to reach this conclusion. These acts and omissions on the part of the
Investigating officers clearly shows that they were hand in gloves with the
accused persons and no material evidence was collected by them during the
course of the investigation, so the previous investigations conducted by the
Investigating officer Nirmal Kumar Jha, and Aditya Ranjan should be
considered null and void.
III. BECAUSE a nil investigation was conducted by the Investigating Officers in

FIR No. 80/2014 and a cancellation report was filed based on the quashed
FIR No. 245/2011.
MALAFIDE INTENTION ON PART OF THE IO AND HIS SUPERVISING

OFFICER:
I. BECAUSE the Investigating Officer Ninnal Kumar Jha committed grave
illegality by filing the cancellation report in FIR No. 245/2011, in spite of
being aware of the fact that the said FIR was quashed and consequently no
criminal proceedings were in existence, therefore, the question of filing of
29
any report in the respect of the same dves not arise. That FIR No. 245/2011
had been quashed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi vide order dated
29.08.20 I 3 because the parties in this FIR had arrived at a settlement and the
Hon'ble Court in its order had categorically held that this quashing order
shall not in any manner affect the case of other complainants and the police
would be at liberty to take appropriate action in accordance with the law.
That this v,1hole illegal exercise was taken up by IO and his supervising
officer to protect the Accused Company and its people from the clutches of
criminal law. This illegal closure repo1t was to be used in closing
investigations in other FIR's which were filed qua this project.
II. BECAUSE the Ld. CMM, South vide order dated 20.03.2014 in FIR No.
245/201 l had mentioned that IO Ninnal Kumar Jha had failed to give an
explanation as to how the cancellation/ closure rep01t was filed in FIR No.
245/2011, as the same had been quashed by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi
vide order dated 29.08.2013.
III. BECAUSE the Ld. CMM, South vide order dated 09.07.2014 held that the
police report was filed to the effect that the allegations mentioned in the
complaint filed by the Petitioners are similar to the FIR No. 245/20 I 1 in
which cancellation/closure report was filed after the quashing of proceedings
by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi. Fmther, the quashing order in FIR No.
245/2011 was on the basis of settlement between the parties and not on the
merits of the case.
IV. BECAUSE the investigating agency had without fear of any consequences of
playing fraud upon the Hon'ble Comt, kept the quashed FIR No. 245/20 I I
alive in order to use it to the advantage of the Accused persons as and when
needed. The Investigating officer not only investigated an FIR which was
quashed but also used it to fu1ther manipulate the justice delivery mechanism.
V. BECAUSE the cancellation report in FIR 245/2011 was filed with the
intention to manipulate the investigation conducted in FIR No. 80/2014 and
to portray that the FIR No. 245/201 I was quashed on merits for its being civil
nature. The Investigating officer by filing a cancellation rep01t in FIR No.
30
80/20 i 4 without ...:onducting any effective investigation. tried to save the

accused persons from the clutches of criminal justice system.
IO'S TRYING TO GIVE COGNIZABLE OFFENCE A CiVIL COLOUR: -

I. BECAUSE the Ld. ACMM, South in its order dated 27.09.2019 had
acknowledged the fact that the present complaint discloses the commission of
cognizable offences and had thereby directed to register the FIR. It is evident
from the order itself that Ld. CMM after applying its mind has found some
incriminating material against the company on the basis of which the
direction for registering an FIR was issued.
AUTHORITIES RELIED UPON:-
I. BECAUSE the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sidhartha Vahisht vs. State (NCT
of Delhi) 2010 6 SCC 1, has held that it is not only the responsibility of the
investigating agency, but also of the courts to ensure that investigation is fair
and does not in any way hamper the freedom of an individual except in
accordance with the law. An equally enforceable canon of the criminal law is
that high responsibility lies upon the investigating agency not to conduct an
investigation in a tainted or w1fair manner. The investigation should not
prima facie be indicative of a biased mind and every effort should be made to
bring the guilty behind the bars as nobody stands above the law.
II. BECAUSE the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of R.S. Sodhi, Advocate
vs. State of U.P 1994 SCC Supp. (1) 142 held that, where allegations were
made against a police officer, the Court ordered the investigation to be
transferred to CBI with an intent to maintain the credibility of the
investigation, public confidence and in the interest of justice. Ordinarily, the
courts would not exercise such jurisdiction, but the expression 'ordinarily'
means normally, and it is used where there can be an exception. It means in
the large majority of cases but not invariably. 'Ordinarily' excludes
extraordinary or exceptional circumstances. In other words, if exceptional
circumstances exist, the court may exercise its jurisdiction to direct 'fresh
31
investigation' and even transfer cases to courts of higher jurisdiction which

may pass such directions.
Ill. BECAUSE the Hon'ble Supreme Com1 in the case of Vinay Tyagi vs. !rshad
Ali & Ors. 2013 5 SCC 762 held when can superiorly comt order 'de novo
investigation'.
"33. At this slage, we may also state another well-settled canon oj criminal
jurisprudence that the superior courts have jurisdiction under Section 482 of
Cr.P.C or even Article 226 of the Constitution of India to direct 'further
investigation', 'fresh' or 'de novo · and 'reinvestigation'. 'Fresh, ' 'de novo, ·
and 'reinvestigation' are synonymous expressions and their result in law
would be the same. The superior courts are even vested with the powers of
transferring investigation fi'01n one agency to another, provided the ends of
justice so demand such action. Ofcourse, it is also a settled principle that !his
power has to be exercised by the superior courts ve,y sparingly and with
great circumspection .....
35. The power to order/direct 'reinvestigation· or 'de novo' investigation falls

in the domain ofhigher courts, that too in exceptional cases. Of one examines
the provisions ofCr.P.C, there is no specific provision for cancellation of the
reports, except that the investigating agency can file a closure report. Even
such a report is subject to acceptance by the Ld Magistrate who, in his
wisdom, may or may not accept such a report. For valid reasons, the Court
may, by declining to accept such a report, direct 'further investigation, • or
even on the basis of the record of the case and the documents annexed
thereto, summon the accused.
36. The Cr.P.C does not contain any provisions which deals with the court
competent to direct 'fresh investigation', the situation in which such an
investigation can be conducted, if at all, and finally the manner in ·which the
report so obtained shall be dealt with. The superior courts can direct conduct
of a 'fresh '/'de novo' investigation, but unless ii specifically direcls that the
report already prepared, or the investigation so far conducted will not form in
32
the record of the case. In other wnrds, but for a S/>CL·(/ic order by the superior
court, the reports. whether a primaT)' report or a report upon further
investigation' or a rf>port upon :fi·esh investigation,· shall have to be construed
and read conjointly. Where there is a specific order made by the court for
reasons like !he investigation being entirely W?fair. tainted, undesirable or
being based upon no truth. the court ·would have lo spec(fically direcl that the
investigation or proceedings so conducted shall stand cancelled and will not
form part of the record for consideralion by lhe Court of competent
jurisdiction ...
37. What ultimately is the aim or significance of the expression fair and
proper investigation' in criminal jurisprudence? It has a twin purpose. Firstly,
the investigation must be unbiased, honest, just and in accordance with law.
Secondly, the entire emphasis on a fair investigaiion has to be to bring out the
truth of the case before the court of competent jurisdiction. Once these twin
paradigms of fair investigation are satisfied, there ·will be the least
requirement for the court of law to- interfere with the investigation, much less
quash the same, or transfer it to another agency. Bringing out the truth by fair
and investigative means in accordance with law would essentially repel the
ve,y basis of an wifair, tainted investigation or cases of false implication.
Thus, it is inevitable for a court oflaw to pass a specific order as to the fate of
the investigation, which in its opinion is wifair, tainted and in violation of the
settled principles of investigative canons.
The Hon'ble Supreme Com1 has made it perfectly clear when can a fresh/de-
novo investigation' be ordered by superior in the above-mentioned case.
IV. BECAUSE the current case at hand is a perfectly fit and proper case for the
Hon'ble High Comt to consider investigations conducted by PS - EOW in
FIR No. 80/2014 null and void and Order a 'de novo investigation' taking
into account the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Vinay
Tyagi vs. lrshad Ali 2013 5 SCC 762 as tainted investigation was carried out
by the Investigating officers since inception and pass an order for annulling
33
Lhe previous investigations conducted by the Investigating officer Ni rmal

Kumar Jha & Aditya Ranjan.
V. BECAUSE the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Neetu Kumar Nagaich vs. State of
Rajasthan (2020) I 6 SCC 777 held that,
"1 O.Normally when an investigation has been concluded and police report
submitted under Section 173(2) of the Code, it is only further investigation
that can be ordered under Section 173(8) of the Code. But where the
constitutional court is satisfied that the investigation has not been conducted
in a proper and objective manner, as observed in Kashmeri Devi vs. Delhi
Admn 1988 SCC (Cri) 864, ji·esh investigation with the help of an
independent agency can be considered to secure the ends ofjustice so that
truth is revealed. The power may also be exercised if the court comes lo the
conclusion that the investigation has been done in a manner to help someone
to escape the clutches of law. In such exceptional circumstances the court
may, in order to prevent miscarriage of criminal justice, direct de nova
investigation as observed in Babubhai vs. State of Gzyarat (2010) 12 SCC
254. A fair investigation is as much a part of a constitutional right
guaranteed under Article 21 ofthe Constitution as a fair trial, without which
the trial will naturally not be fair. The observations in this context in
Babubhai are considered as follows:
45. Not only fair trial but fair investigation is also part of constitutional
rights guaranteed under Artkles 20 and 21 of the Constitution of India.
Therefore investigation must be fair, transparent and judicious as it is the
minimum requirement of rule of law. The investigating agency cannot be
permitted to conduct an investigation in a tainted and biased manner. Where
non-inte1ference of the Court would ultimately result in failure ofjustice, the
court must inte1fere. In such a situation, it may be in interest ofjustice that
independent agency chosen by the High Court makes aji·esh investigation."
VI. BECAUSE the present case before this Hon'ble Court is a case where no fair
investigation as guaranteed under Articles 20 & 21 of the Constitution was
34
conducted by both tht: IO's PS - EOW. Keeping in mind the rationale of tht:
Hon'ble Supreme Court in Neetu Kumar Nagaich vs. the State of Rajasthan
(2020) 16 SCC 777, in the interest of justice, the Hon'ble High Comt of
Delhi should order an independent agency to conduct a fresh investigation
and simultaneously declare the previous investigation conducted by IO's PS -
EOW as null and void.
PRAYER
In the view of the above mentioned above, it is, therefore respectfully prayed that
this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue appropriate Order(s) or Direction(s) to: -
A. Direct respondent to conduct 'fresh/de novo investigation' by cancelling the
previous investigation holding it as null and void because: -
1. The nature of the investigation carried out by investigating officers Mr.
Nirmal Kumar Jha and Mr. Aditya Ranjan PS - EOW was c01Tupt,
malafide, tainted & biased and was conducted ilkgally in connivance with
the accused persons.
2. In order to help the accused, a nil investigation was conducted in fir no.
80/2014 and a manipulated cancellation report was filed illegally on the
basis of the quashed fir no. 245/2011 by floating the orders of this Hon'ble
High Court vide order dated 29.08.2013.
3. No attempts were made to collect evidence, no custodial interrogation of
accused persons ever took place and the investigating officers along with
their supervising officers were hand in glove with the accused persons to
extend illegal benefits to them.
B. Issue/pass any other order(s) or direction(s) that this Hon'ble Court may deem fit
and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.
PETITIONER
THROUGH
NEW DELHI
DATE:t~l 1.2022
(H.S. Bhullar, SarabjeetKaur, Harshvardhan
Indronil Mohan,Gulnaz Khan, Lalima Gosh,
B!tullar Law Firm
E-69, Greater Kai lash Enclave-I,
New Delhi-I I 0048
35
IN THE IDGH COURT OF DELID AT NEW DELID

(EXTRA ORDINARY CRIMINAL JURISDICTION)
CRL. MISC. MAIN PETITION NO. OF 2022
IN THE MATTER OF:

SARASH KUMAR SADH AND ORS. . .. Petitioner's
VERSUS
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELID ... Respondent
AFFIDAVIT
I, Sarash Kumar Sadh, S/O Sh. Late Shri Hira Lal, ~ged abq~t ~ years, RIO 71,
Kailash Hills, East Kailash Colony, New Delhi do hereby solemnly affirm and declare
as under.
1. That I am the Petitioner in the aforesaid Petition and ani well acquainted with
the facts and circumstances of the case.
2. That the present Petition has been drafted under my instructions which has
been read and understood by me and I say that the averments made therein are
true based on the records and believed to be correct.
3. That the contents of Para 1- _ ofthe abovementioned Petition are drafted by

my counsel and based on legal advice received from my counsel I believe to
be true.
4. I say that the Annexures to the above-mentioned Petition are true copies/true
i.\ .
36
VERIFICATION -
k.1\ . .
Verified at Delhi o~November 2022 that the contents of the aforesaid affidavit are
true and correct to the best of my knowledge and believe and nothing material has
been concealed therefrom.
~~~,
DEPONENT
, ..- .,
37

IN THE MATTER OF:

SANJAY BHARGAV AND ORS. . ..Petitioner's
VERSUS
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI ... Respondent
AFFIDAVIT
I, Sanjay Bhargav, S/o Shri D.K. Bhargav, ag~d about~y.ears, R/O M-38, Saket, New
Delhi do hereby solemnly affirm and declare·as under.
1. That I am the Petitioner in the aforesaid Petition and am well acquainted with
3. That the contents of Para 1- _ of the abovementioned Petition are drafted by

be true.
typed copies of their respective originals.
38
VERIFICATION +V)
Verified at Delhi on~ovember 2022 that the contents of the aforesaid affidavit are
true and correct to the best of my knowledge and believe and nothing
39
IN THE IDGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

IN THE MATTER OF:

RADHA BHARGAV AND ORS. ...Petitioner's
VERSUS
AFFIDAVIT
I, Radha Bhargav, W/o Shri Sanjay Bhargav, aged aboIJt S( years, RIO M-38, Saket,
New Delhi do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under.
I . That I am the Petitioner in the aforesaid Petition and am well acquainted with
3. That the contents of Para I-_ of the abovernentioned Petition are drafted by
be true.
The Petitioner has not preferred any similar or other Petition before any other
Court.
~~~~
DEPONENT
40
VERIFICATION J._.\J\_
,,.l
Verified at Delhi on_ November 2022 that the contents of the aforesaid affidavit are
true and correct to the best of my knowledge and believe and nothing material has
~....
.-'J' -~
... ~ . . ,-..l
4, l' - (,,,,<.•"'
'll'
~ ··
"'v
Wa:,, ,-:• :.·,,-.

l)f!1Q11.
lO H"•- '·
NuLarv oe1..n'
41
;

IN THE MATTER OF:

REENA SINGH AND ORS. . . .Petitioner's
VERSUS
AFFIDAVIT .
I, Reena Singh, W/o Shri Virpal Singh. a;ged about i l years, RIO C-702 Kaveri
Apartments, Alakhnanda, New Delhi do ·h(;)ieby solemnly.affirm anc(declare as under.
: ·-~.
1. That I am the Petitioner in the aforesaid Petition and am w~ll acquainted with

be true.
42
f
VERIFICATION ,+V' ·
Verified at Delhi mf? November 2022 that the contents of the aforesaid a
true and correct to the best of my knowledge and believe and
OE Lr1 1
"· 43

IN THE MATTER OF:

VIRPAL SINGH AND ORS. ... Petitioner's
VERSUS
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELID ... Respondent
AFFIDAVIT
,.
'i . ·..
I, Virpal Singh, S/O Sh. Late Narayan Singh,,_;cige_ci about 70 years, RIO C- 702, Kaveri
. .
Apartments, Alaknanda, New Delhi- 11001? ·do _h_ereby solemnly affirm and declare
as under.
1. That I am the Petitioner in the aforesaid Petition and am well acquainted with

be true.
5. The Petitioner has not preferred any similar or other Petition befi e,any other
Court.
,,..
" 44
VERIFICATION .)..V1
Verified at Delhi o?i!.._November 2022 that the contents of the aforesaid affidavit are
true and correct to the best of my knowledge and believe and nothing terial has/
e,el'\\t"'I<-' ~ "'.
"'4al:, ~-· .. . .
oe~•• · ·
\0 \f'•
45
Annexure - A
46
f1ff:1ff!
::;-:
47
48
...
~
-..,;: ... .
_··/ :."· ,-'..:···
~~.- --...~.
-
;g~t:>1.-ll¾t?Jfc,,,~r::.t1rir1¥} ...
. ..· ' ..._, ,. ~ :-
49
Eros Group has scripted some of the most innovative charters in real estate development,
hospitality aml lown planning for over 60 years.A leading corporate hou• .,, it ha~ deep
interests in Real Estate Development, having tleveloped townships and housing proiects m
and around Delhi. The Group's landmark projects in the residential sector include
Lakewood Ci~y. Rosewood City, Eros Grand Mansions and Eros Escalade. Its sterling
presence in the hospitality industry is marked with the 5-star Hotel lnterContinental Eros
in Nehru Place and Hotel Shangri-La at Connaught Place. Its corporate developments are
marked by International Trade Tower and the landmark Eros CorporateTowers.
With each successful foray. Eros Group has been t ranslating many a dreams into reality.
Today Eros Group is a force to reckon with.having a proven track record of maintaining high
standards of quality, safety and futuristic planning.
~ 7 '·\:'•~~::;-=::·.::>:,,~~~~
,, .
i
.. ~ •·... .: -.. ·--·a
Eros Grand Mansions

\J Eros EscJade l a~ewood Cr!y
:r.-:- ~"-!!' '
~~!!,S~r,,:;::<~- ~ i i •
;i.
Eros Markel Place

~'
Gurgaon Sura1~und Surajt<und lrl!l~apuram

50
51
It will soon be here. A mirror to the
hopes and aspirations of people, A 5-star
destination for those who believe in
success, strive for it, attain it and are
now not afraid to announce to the world
The vision is 5-star... so is the future of retail.

they have arrived, A monument to life.
A monument to the human desire to
excel. And a window of opponunity for
those who know how to read the writing
on the wall.
52
··., "J·.··~-
·, ,•
ErJoylhe assurance:ro:_1_,~j9-r:r[n1.cl9b.l¢:-:g .}/!fi1~r--

-~ tt--~:., • ~- 7 ~;; :· ·."- ~ - /,r. ;
~I::.·
~i,
:,t,~
~ I
I
__,· .
.
~:
-
,,,
.-----
..-i;----.:.::-~
,,ru. l
:. ~~
'!"!!~
... ,1..-,.
-.-.. ~
!!,.-i,=;
Hotel Shangri-La Hotel lnte:Continenlal Eros
Nev,Dolhi Nehru Place. New Delhi
53
Eros Boulevard. It's not only about fo otfutl.
It's about the qt1ality of footfall.
A premium shopping destination set
in a super premium 5-star luxury
environment. A differentiated experience
that'll redefine the way, the well heeled
shop, entertain,and indulge. Think about it.
And go for it.
:.~ ..:~:~., ..
/
.-----
·.-✓-
54
i
I
!'
I
!
55
In the !ush exclusive environs of Eros
Boulevard, shoppers will experience
an ambience like never before, and no
place else.
A truly premium 5-star experience with a
bouquet of selecr. brands that will be
available to the discerning shopper. An
exparience that wili rewrite th., rules of
retailing in India.
With over 1,00,000 square feet of premium
shopping, located within a 5-star deluxe
hotel with 3S0 rooms & suites, exclusive
service apartments, 24 hr All day dining,
multi cuisine speciality restaurants, roof top
bar, banquets, business center, spa, health
club,beauty parlour and a barber shop.
A tribute to the finer things of life.
And a testimony to the future of retail.

56
57
------1---· -·····-·--·--1-.--- -·--\-\~~\--\-------~ i - --1-1--
58
--,-==- - -- - ... -
M.S. CAR PARKING
MAYUR
VIHAR
DLF OlSTfUCT
GAU.ERIA CENTER
d□--- fl PARl<ING
====~~
:::::=:2;. ~
<« N.H.-24 NOIDA L.lNK ROAD HOIOA>»
LOCATION PLAN EROS ,.,.....,.,,,, AHOOMl.OPUIO
MIS EROS RESORTS AND HOTELS PVT. LTO.

B OULEVARD
HOTEL ~\'Ne PIJIZA
W/rtJR Vo!Wl NcW 08.Jil
· t,t.~ I U l . A Wft11"'1'1CHC,m,-a;:l'Qo\(II,. ..,f1UJV(t.MtllH•1tOllt
1h~NO;ll,G21~k:19....-~...tMa-.
llGolllU&OA'\C" .nr.»aAf'Lur.11,;IUM\M•rtmlTAffJIA,,Q""4u.c.(("",1t~nlQll,lftC.CU,fr';lftt,
aJ<l1~r\U N S.-.0"'1...,,.1'-"U•HUlil,tlk .. lfJ.n) l,IOO.f'CDOll<'l,IH)(l)~.,~-111'>-10,N1,,,'IIOr\,C'II
l
l,C,rt "1"[U U ~"l.-(~.E'f11llV," !ll;lo.l #,1'f"l'l'T
r------ - 59
-
I l'~•l
.,-
!(~•-,
/1 .
rn'-!1t,f,l''~•mP.,
--
\ti'.~~~- , . :'?/J\,,;;,wt . .·.,,
. •; ~
---------
#lfi
~
;~:-~.:~.~
~
---
~
I I Im
.
1.~1:··\
;~
.. ·---- . . .
1
:I
I ,lifl·
l'.-it ,il.tl.~l.~l~l§tl~l.~l~l~~:····-· 0
••
·-·-- eMtLi a~ ..,62 ,jJ~l-»11. ila,~lnl
1,·$J
a'';;JJ
.~"r.l
. ..
. ,,•.11j·•=••··
I; l'
CORJIIDCl'l l"-C"'\\ll)e
1>1~ttt COMJDOFI 8"-VW0£
_., . :f~.Jlg,·
. ·' ··...
,~,.a~J
:,~n-.•
. l
I I I @
o., IUP o., i@
I ATRJUJ.l ua ATRJUM
, ...~= .. ~~ /
' l2l!I~2tl~l~::; I I
'1 TERRACE. """"
GARDEN .. • • •· , 1, •'
~ TERRAC~:G~DE~
1/ I
1· @
I ......; -~--~ ..
p-- .,~!.~ I~ 1~ ,! ~A~l~ISi .

m , . · · ,• · •·
.i.
l,,i:<j,',;:r,:,;,i:~,•n_~,..
--r.i.
.,k~~Jr
·· ll~~ • ; ,
Ii "'"'"'""
M msc,, ,.-,.,..
@ l •i.· l;;;;t;
'.-~k..;."i;tf, -,•. ,.•. : I .T . '.
· · , I , I·· --v 1 ~-··[·'-Y.'1'°!= ~ t @.._ ~, :Sfl~ mW ,.r-_ ----(-:-....,_-
~•~~¥-·.: :~. i'El •''Jo:tf'~~
!tfl>~·-•w,-,~r-~-- :cYr
I l
~ '\ . ••l~"l'J,..:J,,.
· ·. illr~~.!i{';.;"~~r. .H;
"' - ~ •
r II I
'
: r·1-~.
. I.'
,.
.
I . ! t
'
11 .
\ r~-. . ·;•.,-.•·••r'1::,
~-:. t·
\
._ . _: :~: i~:t){:z~.:.Y/
.. ~·,· .• , ..,.•·.:
. ,; ·'.·~·.::~ ,.,\;.C;J~;::;..:.;·;'~i,
. ~~( - ,'lD~(')lq;f'f.'.){!
li-·"· - - -
4~i~i~'i_~..~ ..·.f; ••-·--~ ·- .._.
MAIN
PORCH
'.l~~~:~!ll~i~1\W~~t~F •.
~~ w-~=--
..
\._ _______ .·-:....._~-

..,,.e:-~~:e.~~4:W\~;._,;~~~!~-1t'!~~~~
....,.., ..,.,.....,.. ...... ,..,_-..;:.;,,.,_-.·-- ;..,;;
. . -- - ., - - - -··
LOBBY FLOOR PLAN EROS PROMOTERS AND CIMLOPERII
OULEVARD M/S EROS RESORTS AND HOTELS Pvt. Ltd.

1t=li..~:. sc.avu,
4Ul-01• - l::'!i
'-•£ .\N)11E ,~,.i.s.-..:; AAf~ •JtE •i.t,••••111: ..-a-.Re Si.O.lr;f '.J .tJ>•flov.1i r.iov TN?ST11ru,01-v
·-.i '$AJOV\A>I~ IIIDARLt.S '\U,'- et: A,l l!f:!:J UC o·• E~ c •C""-"GECV,m,cui ,&Sl,C111G.11t,Alt,i.:;oH1~,sat.'VE•
B HOTEL CRC"IINE PLAZA
MAYUR\i\H/-.:1 NEWOELHI
S-\.AMERICAHPU.ZA,, ll(TERt~TIOnAl. 1,v..oe T<JWE:A, p.~,RU pL.,lCe. ~ DELtt1-1;
1 I 'tC"IEa ,au,s, ◄ 0-,.\1t.t.~t fuP[.a ~~.,•~\JAA;l!:ll'.E9
_ I '-..,, / I PHOHEN02lMZ27'0.20<21000 • ..,.,. ...,.,,.,.~•oZ""'·"'''" Ii
60
,... , _, __'r(!.:;_1..:~
EROS
MARKET PLACE
',ts,.,••>,;::.:¾_~_~_:l::y:5-~--~'- ~$/.'. • :
. {~~;?~;~:~;~~;,· .
.. .. . , .. -~ -: ~:~~ \
ER.OS _J;_-_l.~---
-~--.
CORPORATE - ~
TOWER ' j r - _..--.
,A part of MayurVihar District Center on the Noida Delhi Link Road. connecting NH24 co Noida • 4 kms from Akshardham
Temple • 3 kms from Sector 18, Noida • 9 kms from Maharani Bagh • 2 kms from DND flyway • On the roadmap of the proposed
DND offshoot· Located within the prestigious 5-scar Hotel Crowne Plaza. Mayur Vihar • Plot open and accessible on all 4 sides.
.,-, ·, . .,-----=---------
61
-==------::.:.._:_:··~----·-·-
--------------!-,----
~'Ul!I) '-· ' .
¼ ,.:
r ••
:
i5'"-,,~.
1..Wf11 /i~~~• .. - ..
---=-·-·
l:VUW-K:E'LOiJBYi
l'-:?:~i'"··,•1 . • • . • I
,_:[~~s!;'!",;{:~·-.•· ',,:i tj'.~!/.;,"; ~,:;j•·., -~--"".:r~~ - ®DI!!, -
' 1, ' .. ' .
,,, ,_w):i!,,··,l ,,···.·.·~ ,fl'(M,;J:c,._:.; 1· 1 • ,_ ~'<-~;:,okfilllrt1"~:i1 ~~ _ -©- ':
tt):•M·•:,:.;):.-'· .:_;-J ~~--~~~;!\: :· ~-;.·"ft~"i~/4f-!\~1t'~.rt !.~1:r~-t-....?~~. "1!,: • .
I
..' . .,,! L.,•.,__!> ....... ,, • : ' •Jt,S,,.::;,:,;i:_._·~_!:.,\ r,si,,._::;;o'-~#~.:i:.,,_·1_. . ..,,]lffil,ip,tq~w.,_-::-__ 1·-·-""'=--·,
::;::i_
, ;;@_..... '~ I "40$t~(·@~:F-~:!. ~,.:--;·@?~:{ -~.J?itt!lEtftr-::· . - ~--------

·· , ·.
1
·~~- : • · -
! ..
·· ,·~: j:f·:t.1:Yr;;,~::;'./;~; @ .,,._.,.

001U.'tCEI.D08Y1
~~t.· · - :~ ,,.__ ----r- __
------------
•· &,.,,.,.
-~----
@••••
§~
I ;::;;-@
....... ffi
~ \:!S1
@- 'IF•
f f i - . ·.·__ ..1,. ·_·.·._··--···-- ..._.. 1.
r:;:, 1.:},:.•,-;..,"'".,' ·:·,•i'
I @-
ffi
~
@aw; I
.
i ':'
I_~
@_
tuS(dl,
I■ -
........... .................
\
At/Ct<O.l
@ ®
"""' .,,•.,.
I®~
g ~@ @ ® @
'""'· •~e:a-. """·
@
tltlklP.
f
... ,.
1·---r~:r:\~·;
:_-':-:·j}l1:·~
: frt:~~:tr ~-. ,;
Mfl"~~~f .... ti&SCF
® ® ®
002w~sCf,C01&Cf,1471CF.
1 ® I®.I
m
:s
CU.Sa'. $3-'-SC,,
. .
@
740BQP.
\
I
)
11;,;onc.r,
.. . ~~ • • , ·• I "'I . ·t , .f '
_,_lll'l"',li, ~-
ANCl;jOR
flTRIW fff. A'JRIW
@)
26 Fl:ET VllOf 2BfEET\\lOE .,....oc,.
-~iti
~•.::
', /-. 'l ·- 'I/ I
8l:J~~~~; ~ "~"~ ~ , . UM~~~

.. · ~ - ,.• ~ , ,i I I
~ I~~
. ~~~
:I .)
✓ ~
@ @ @ @ ,@.. ,@, @., , @ _ 1~ro
/ !
r~~'"'
l
l'o".I 0, , /1D ·
.~. ;tffi\i; ,~:• ffi ffi·. a:-i;, l'.o".'I :•ffi, I
~~
.•. , . .- . ·. .: •. ,· , :·;/~ i.·::.1-~ t:.:i~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~~
.'.J:l:Y..:;.~ ,!_.,.~-_""'_·'~11:~...-.rlt-..
,.~.,, n~".
·--~~--~~. Ji 1s-l¾l ~=.J: ..,_,.,,
~I
::·.'.1l.
-~ \.~••
J
b~~-:~.w~~:·_t>; ): .,::·f
r-•r-
·It" ir, l:!~~!'!'il ~'.,;i~ .W.'S'r
]/
:I
n
i
~SERVICES
....,~~
...
.......111
1-
:\ j
l . ~ -
GROUND FLOOR PLAN

.------ EROS PROMOTERS mo OMlOPERS
•\l OtC\Al',IE~ • f••E Aa0"1i:P\M:8A'i01!.REASAAE T°"Aft\.~ ....Q""-!:'.SUB.IEC'""TON',,,.O'•m. rr.oMtHJ:ST.\MOlrY'

·-1')nttl[8. fME SAIO P~l3AJ(DAIIIEM f.lAY DE Al.TEP.ED. "40CCl"fftl,AOWQEtl\\mtJ\lfAS9Crlrl;l,/tr 11:E,\SOJ(\\H\TriDt"VtP..
·~i ARlA.13N0\\11AJIE S\JPF.AM!AltlD:UAREUEf
B OULEVARD
HOTEL CROWNE PIAZ,\
MAYlJR VlHAR liEW DELHI
M/S EROS RESORTS AND HOTELS Pvt. Ltd.
S-1, AJ.lffilCNI PlAZ,I, INTERN>.11OHAI. TR.lllE TOwtR , tlEMRU PU.CE. N OEUil-19
PHONE NO 26422740,26427805 o-morl: oro,;roup0do12,vonl,not.rn
62
~ 8 63
Annexure - B
· Rachna Arora Vs. EROS Resorts & Hotels Ltd.

CC No. 166/1
14.12.2011
Present: None for complainant.
On the earlier occasion, I have heard arguments on application U/s
156(3) Cr.PC, Status reports filed by the EOW.

~-
Admittedly, there .is number of misrepresentations given to
0 complainant and likewise other allottees. Even as on today, Preferential Location
Charges are demanded.' There is no provision in the agreed points as to which
• location will be considered as preferential. In all, there appears to be lots of lapses
\... in this matter and even there appears to be lapses/cheating with the Govt. i.e ODA
as the project appears to be time bound project for Commonwealth Games.
In these circumstancesj the collection of evidence is of such a nature
which cannot be collected by compla.inant as most of the same is with accused
persons or other Govt. bodies like DOA.
So, SHO PS EOW is directed to investigate the matter after lodging
0 an FIR.
Copy of the order be given to Naib Court Crime Branch for
compliance and necessary action.
Put up for report and cdnsideration on 21.01.2012.
, .
_,sJ - ... .
, ... ' h~
~,. .i. :· (Rc;1kesh ,Par-i0it)~ t;ei
AfJMM/s"i5/S~k~t CourtS/14.12.2011
64
' t
UnutiedPage fl
1i251i.01J
Annexure - C
FIRST INFORMATION REPORT
(Undar Saclion 154 Cr. P .C. )

( Internet Copy)
CRIME AND RAILWAYS P.S: · E.O.W YEAR: 2011 FIR NO: 0245 OATE:
1. District:
2. Act(s): Sectlon(s):
11)1PC 1860 109
C2)1PC 1860 467
(3}1PC 1860 407
(t)IPC 1860 1208
{5)1PC 1860 468
(6)1PC 1860 415
(7)1PC 1860 34
(BJIPC 1860 471
(9JIPC 1860 420
(10JIPC 1860 406
:1. Occurence of Offence:

(a) Day: Friday Date From: 01/12/2006 Date To: 16/12/2011 · ..
Time Period:
'!> 'Time From: hrs Time To: hrs
(bl Information received at P.S: Date: 16/12/2011 Time: 09:30 hrs
0 (cl Dally Diary Relerence :

4. Type of Information: WRITTEN
Ent_ry No: 2A Time: 09:30 hrs
5. Pia co of Occurrence:
.
(;i) Oiroctlon and Distance from P.S: 0.00KM Beat No: •
(bl Address: S 1,AMERICAN PLAZA,INTERN�TIONAL· TRAOE
• TOWER.NEHRU· PLACE,NEW DELHI.
·
0
(cl In �se. Outside lhe lfmlt of the Polfce.Statlon:

Nnme of P.S: District:
6. Complalnant /Informant:
(;,.) Name: MS. RACHNA ARORA (S/0) SH. SUMIT ARORA·--..__
lb) Oate/Year of Birth: 0 Natlonallty: INDIAN
(c) Passport No: Oa te of Issue: Place of )lj:SI.Jo:
(di Occupation:
(c) Address: B2 /165. PASCHIM VIHAR. NEW DELHl-110063 '
7. Oetalls of Known I Suspected·/ .Unknown accusad ·with full partlculars{attach separate sheet If necessary).:
_
(1) Mt S EROS RES9RTS & HOTELS PVT. l:'IO.
(2) MR. SATISH soop (MANAGING DIRECTOR)
(3) MR. AMIT RAI SOOD (DIRECTOR)
(4) MR. RAMAN S00\) (DIRECTOR)
(51 MR. SUMITS OOD (DIRECTOR)
0
0 (6) MR. S. K. GUPTA (EMPLOYEE/OFFICIAL)

(71 MR. VIJAY KUMAR KAPOOR (EMPLOYEE/OFFICER)
(8) MR. ASHOK KUMAR SINGH (EMLOVEEIOFFICER.)
(9J MR. MOHIT SHARMA (EMPLOYEE/BOOKING OFFICER )
(10) MR. A.K. KAUL (ARCHITECT/ ENGINEER)
(11) MR. DIPANKAR DUTTA (ARCHITECT)
(12) MR. GANESH RAI JUNEJA ( ENGINEER)
(13) MR. AMIT SHARMA (DIRECTOR OF ROOMS).
(14) DY. DIRECTOR (SLOG) C&I
(15) DEPUTY HEALTH OFFICER
8. Ro:ison for delay In reporting by the complalnant informant: .
9. Particulars of properties lltolen/ lnvolved(attach separato sheot If necessa ry):
hnp•//de1hri;ollce.sel\.erp.,o;,le.cOtMirwebtert\'.llReporlVi8V,9r,aspx 1/8
·1
\
1• r.
·
65
-�J·�1
·: ,•�·:;;•·•�:}!�
%�·
UntiUed Page . L-. . .
7'25/2014
·s Property Type(Descrl pllon) Est Va lu e(Rs.) St att.,·', . , ..•/· , �"--.
•· ';'(I.
1 0. Total value of property stohin: i ·:., ;i{ ..., ill � ;
1 ! . ln11uost Roport / LI.O. Ca$G No., If a ny: . �• ' (=l �,! , •�.\:I
I • _,
.
�•-Li.J,
�,.....-. �, \. " Cl:"""'

4.
-.- - �
� ,
l,4of
1
.,f}1
• 1 ;;. F.I.A Contu nls(a ltac;h sepa ra te sheet, lf requlrc_d): .
.'
\� �,f� � y i
IN n�e COURT OF ADDITIONAL CHIEF ME'IR�POL.ITAN MAGISTRATE, SAKET COURTS. NEW DE:l.HI. COMPl.AINT CA�.-</.f{f$J-"y�O\)�
201 I1 . N lHE MATIER OF:Ms. RACHNA ARORA W/o Sh. sumll Arora, R/o · B G-7/72, Paschlm Vlhar, Presently resldlng•;��.uil__ ( ��•
Paschtm Vlhar. New Dalhl-1 1 0063. . COMPLAINANT :VERSUS 1. M/ s EROS RESORTS & HOTELS PVT. LTO. "THR,O1,JGH7f""'
DIRE CTOR'S. 2. Mr, Satisli Sood (Managing Director) f.l]o 19. Golf Link, New Deihl, 3. Mr. Amil Raf Sood (Director) Rio 1 �. t;;olf Link, No
Oolhr. 4. Mr. Raman Sooc: (Director). 5. Mr. Sumi! Sood (Director). 6. Mr. S. K. Gupta (Employee/Official). 7. Mr. Vlj�y K_umar KaJXJ1
(Employee/officer). 8. Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh (Emloyee/Officer.) • 9. Mr. Mohlt Sharma (Emj)loyee/Booklng officer ) 10, Mr. A,K. �a1
(Architect/ Engineer) All At:• S-1 . American Plaza. lnt.emallonal Trade Tower: Nehru Piece, New Delhl-1 10019: 1 1 . Mr. -Dlp�nkar Outl
(Architect) 57, Manjusha Bulldlng, 5th Floor, Nehru Place, New Delhi-1 10019. 1 2. Mr. Ganesh Raf Juneja ( Engineer) Clo Juneja Tech
Consuflant Pl,{. Ltd. 5-A, O.D.A. Flats. Sarai Jullena, New Delhl-1 10025. 13, ,,Mr. Amil Shanna (Director of Rooms) S/9 Sh. Chandt
Shekher RJo 210, Ma VIia apartments, Mayur Vihar, Phase-I, New Defhl-1 1 0092. 14. Dy. Director (Bldg) C&I Oelhl Dewlopment Authoril�
Vikas Sadan. INA. New Delhi. 15. Deputy Health Officer Shahdara Sol/th Zone, (M.C.O.) Deihl. 1 6. ACP/(H&R) For Addltlont
Commissioner of Pollce (Licensing). Isl Floor, P,$. Defence Colony. New Deihl. .. ,ACCUSED/RESPONDENT. COMPLAINT UNDEI
SE CTIONS 420/4061407 READ WITH SECTION 415/420/467/468/471 AND UNDER SECTION 1 09/1208/34 IPC ACCOMPANIED wm
APPLICATION UNDER SECTION. 156(3) Cr. P.c. MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWE'JH: 1. ihat the accused No. 1 to 5 are aocus�
company and Its directors and accused ·No. 6 to 10 are employees Under the accused no. 1 to 6 end accused No. 11 & 12 a�
professionals. who fac,hlaled the :accused No. 1 10 5 by di�ng wrong yndertak lnQS and certificate's before the sewral dep�rtments 11 n,
accusod No. 13 also: naw acll� connivance Witl'i accused No. 1 to· 10 end accused 14. To 16 are the, Go\t , Offlclafs being head ODA
MCO and Licens ing respectlwly and Issued wrohg/false certificate In the name or accused No. 1 &13, In actlw connlvanc� wllh ecCIJSBI
No. 1 to 10 and failed to perform their official dulles and misuse their powers. ihat there may be sewral other persons/ department.
officials who may be found as accused during lnves.tigallon on the present complaint. 2. That the accused No. 1 was able to get allotment C
\Ql11able land on a wry cheap rates from the O.D.A�. who had auctlon�d off land In the Natrcsnal Capltal Reglon(N,C.R.) on 1,le pretext o
Common Wealth Games 20.10. lnlact. the O.O.A. had put In place e scheme for·auctlon/tender of 33 hotel sites at cqncesslonal rateii wltl
addllional benefits des pile the fact that there was no need for the same. It Is also �Orth mention here that the accused company was boun<
0 to de"3lop th8 said land prior to Common Wealth Gam�s 2010, but miserably failed to do so lntenllonally and In order to avail the sewra
benefits from the wrious Go\t. Departments falsely showed lts project/hotel to be operational before the Common Wealth Games 2010 will
se\eral valid certificat�s and all this ,could have happened only with the active connivance of Go\t. Officials. It Is further submitted tha
e�rylhing was operat\onal only on papers and actual s tory was/ls quite different. 3, Thal In the month of December 2006 \he accuse,
r.ompany through Its directors and other officials approached the public with their advertls�ments In national news papers and on Internet
issued brochures along wilr other printed malarial In order to collect a huge amount from publlc by s howing a very rosy picture and wltt-
lalse commitments and assurances and In this way motivated the present compJalnanl and her husband besides many other bonafidE
purchasers and were aole to collect over a mfllion thousand rupees by assuring Iha follo'\Yfng things, a, That their project Is based on one
Dub�s ed· similar hotel cum shoppipg arcade erojecl and sold the same by desc·nblng Its project as "Tl:IE FINE ART OF 5 STAF
�NG" WITH EROS BOULEVARD HOTEL CROWNE PLAZA. MAYUR VIHAR NEW DELHI, wttereby, II was spec lfically mentlonec
l'hiii"" ,n Iha lush exclusl;e enwons of Eros Boulevard; shoppers will experience an ambience like nswr before and no.._pJa.c.11.elae." b. Thal
•A truly premium 5 star experience with a bouQuet or: �elec�lnal"Wlfl"beav.illaolEi lo the c!lscemlng shopper. An experience that wfll
rewrite the lutes of retailing tn India." c. That "01,er 1 ,00,000/- square feet or premium s hopping, located within a 5 s tar deluxe hole! with 350
rooms & sulles, excfuslw sel'llce apartments. hrs all day dining, multi cuisine specially restaurants, roof lop bar,. b11nquets, business
r,enter. spa. health club, beauty parlour and a barber shop.• d. That "It will be a tribute to the finer things of fife. And a 'testimony to the
lulure of retail: e. That "Eros Boulevard will be the perfect staging ground for a 5 star cetall re\Olytlon, §preed owr 1 ,001000 sR..!,. across
two lewis . the retail en'-ironrnent Is sculpted with a n unwa"3ring eye for detalf, .Warer bodies Landscaping, design aesthellcs," 1, That "the
finest in amenllles • Making ii the perfect setting for a world class experience where awry "1sll end every o.c ceslon Is a memorable one for
both shoppers and retailers.• g. That "Eros Boulevard • Its not only about footfall but also !ls aboul the quallty of-footran. h. That "A premium
shopping destination s et In a super premium 5-star luxury enlfronment. Differentiated experlencf!S that'll redefine the way, the well• heel!!d'
shop. entertain. and indulge. Think about it and go for ii." I. That "Enjoy the assurance of a formidable ally of Hotel Shangri-La New Delhi,
Hotel lnterConlinenlal Eros 'lahru Place, New Delhi, Eros corporate Tower!; New Deihl' j. Thal "Eros ·group has scripted some or most
innovative chapter in real estate dewfopment hospitallty and lown planning for owr 60 years. A corp orate house, It has deep Interest In Real
Estate Dewlopment, Ha\inp de\eloped townships and housing projects In and around Deihl; The Group's Landnialk projects In the
residential sector include Lakewood City, Rosewood City·. Eros Grand Mansions and Eros Escel�de. 11s sterling presence In the hospltallty
0
indusl,y is Marked with the 5-Star Ho�el lnterConlfnental Eros In Nehru Place and · Hotel Shangri-La at Connaught Place. Its corporate
de\1:!lopmonls are m�rked b}' International trade Tower and Iha landmark Eros Corporate Towefs." ;k. That "With each successful foray, ErQs
Group has been translating many a dreams into reality. Today Eros Group Is a force to red(on with, ha\lng a prown track record of
mamlatnlng high standards of quallly I, safety and futuristic planning." I. Thal "a wall established Hotel I.e. Inter Continental and Combined
Shopping area of more than 1 Lac Sq fl... with world class ambience and state ofArt one brand of hotel, state of class end copy or·Oubal·
based Fl1.e Star hotel named . . .. : All the abow mentioned attractive ass urances. ware lntentlonally mentioned by the accused porsons 1 to
ror thu purpose of extra� llng tiuge amount from the publlc by making a fool or Ille bonaflde purchasers despite the fact that the accused
per�ohs were w,y much aware about the fact thaJ they were not going to construct according to the p(Oposed plans. Photoc;opy
of the
brochure containing the abowmentlonad ass urance.s Is annexed along with the present complaint as ANNE�RE -A (COLL'Y).
4. That the
accused persons approached with lhelr proposed plan to da"3lop a • Complex " comprising of a Hotel together with a Shoppln9 Complex
In
the name and style of "Eros Boufe1,,11rd' consisting of .'Showrooms I shops / AThis / Kiosks of various sizes and dlmenslohs. '5. ihat
In the
'"orith of December 2006, the abow named directors and representall,ias of the Accused Company had Informed the complainant
that · the
Accused Company Intended to undertake the de"3lopmenl & construction of Plot No. 13 A & 13 8 In Mayur Vlhar, District
£@)1'§.,_Delb� .
ll11011gh their printed. brochures end adwrtlsements, This fact later on cam(rn ihe'Rnowteilge ortfie complelnant
_ through agreement that
e land for the sard project was ellotted to the· Accused Company by De!hl Oe�lopment Aut�o
.:� �j�e a)l�ariiTe�!: �0, Fe4
h1Jp://delhipnlrce.s er"3rpeople.com'fimeb!erTl)'ReportVlev.er,aspx
218
... ,
: :. :,, . ·• ·--··•-·····-····-·· ··--· ·. ' \ ~f~·
7125/2014 UnUUGd Page l,..\) ~ 66
12 / 6iCU2156 dated 30.06.2006. and this facl \~as ne..er re\ealed to the complainant or to any other_~µyerlfr the aCClJSEld No. 1 tQ .---:.::.:.::-l
initially. Howe\Ur. u1 same re\\?ae from the contents ci tf'ie agreemen:. 6. That t! was also rel)reserileptoffie C9mplalnant_and to 1~,,<··:,opOtiit~
ether buyers/purchaseriinV3s tors by the sai represen a_ va o I e ccused Company that the Ph slcal os~essl n f.!he said plot ~ . . -: ·: ·. ,p Jf
taken by tho Accused Company on 06.12 2006. That ,t was further represented to _the com alnant that \!de Con~y~nce -~e.!!_q]ate • ~.._ • . Tr~
12.12:ioOG. !!!_e. h·eir'hilld'o\'vnorship of tho said plot has boen duly granted~conwyed. sold. releas~d • transferrep eritassigned unto 1n]~ =-· / ' (_f~ ~
name and fa\l,lur 01 the Accused company. 7. Thal Iha Accused Company through Its directors. and repre9ental)\'8 represented ;10 th, ,·r i}l~1
complainant th;il the Accused Company In order to dewlop lhe said plot. the Accused Company, bejng a renowned real estate pr9J'{lOl(:_i·: r.;::.·•"lf I
~tJ
m1<.I de-.elC>per hallng Vi!SI experience. Is developing the said plot into a complex comprising of a Hotel lofl_elher with a,Sti.0pplo9.Com(>!~~l1';-~.\•... i
lhe namll pnd style of Eros Boulevard (herein after .ca_lled as• project] conslsUng or Showrooms/ shops/ AiMs / Kiosks ofv;irl~ SIS ,z, ., o/.>> .,.. ~
_!!nt1 dimensions. e. Thal belieling lhe representallon$', rnade by the accused company, ls rec ors an avt or zed represerilat~ of,~_,.,,,, ••lq;~
Acr:uscd Com!)any, lo bo !Ne and authenllc the corilplalnant had paid an amount of Rs 14,37,850/-JR1,1pees Fourteen Lacs Thirty $e~~,::v!:'n c So-J~
'<f
ThDusand Eight Hundred and FIiiy Only) to the accused company on the raise represe"iitatlons ohne Qlliclals of the accusad company, ~ : : !
was only aner la se of r:iore than four months that the accused com an entered Into a Sh Q Buyers Agreement ["herel~after called th I
Agrcem n vI e comp a nan on 12 ay of April, 2007 for the purchase bf the ~.J!.grin9 Q. A• ,.Qn ground flOQf,measvrln
approxlmately Super Area of 59:> 'Sq. 1-t•• In lhe said pro)ecI or the Accused CompahV-()n-ltie pay!"Imt Pl,m as Gpeclfiecl In Sch.e~ule ,
altached with the Agreement. 'Ul.2.!.!.!, ls pertinent to mention here that lh!:,~..il.!1.cf..ponalJlons or the said agreement were compJ!!,\tJ.!y_o
sided and tolall~ mend by the Accusetf Company~in!ne-sh~apeor'6oolile. Copy or the said Agreement &:Schedule A dated 12th April 200
rs nnnexed here n as ~1{1Ef1<C/RE='8''7 . a ecause e comp alnant wanted to avafl the facOltles or loan for purchasing and, lnwstlng I:
the said project ol the Accused Company and lbr the said purpose or loan the Accused Compariy, Its directors and representatlws assure-
the complainant to prollde slstance along with the approwd sanction plans '!_f the ~aid project which shall be pro'ilded by th,
Accused Company ror racllitaling the· loan distiursa o. e comp a nan • llia Il ls pertinent to mention here that UII dale the Aqcvse1
Company. its directors and representallws ha1.e squarely failed to supply the requisite documents containing the approval plans etc 11
resp eel or the said project as committed by the Accused Company to the complalnant des pita jhe fact that the complalnant req11ested th,
accused persons for the same . but due to which the. complainant c·ould nol avail the loan faclllty from the bank leading to. herdshlp !
01isery 10 the complalrianl on this account. 10. That in the said agreement. the Accused Com any had Integrated a clause 1.e Cl!!_\IS8 2(g
QI Iha said agreeme111. In respect of Preferential Loca on C arges, whlc w~s. se,e,Elfica~ly.. omllled In e sa ~greemenl ~y ~.!!J!!Q)v"
(Not Applicab e n respac o es op space pure ese y reserwd for th.a comolaloaot•..J.1.Toat II ls pertlnen11'iiiieiil!ori'tiere that In ttt,
19 t r,f abowmen one ac $, no re eren ,a oca on Charges were applicable to the complainant which• was otherwise to be paid 11
oddllion h'> the Basic; Sale Price for which the c;omplalnant agreed to enter Into the said agreement as per Sohedule of the Agreement. bul
0 lhe accused perso11s are very much professloriai .and use_ d to cheating the bonafide buyers In the guise of eha19ln1;1 Illegal Preferentle
Lo,:allon Charges. 12. That since beginning efl$r msldn9 the first paymont to the accused company on the false Insurances, of the accuse•
No. 2 to 9. the complainant approached the Accu~ed Company and to the other ec;cused parsons, a number of times with the request t,
pro-.lde the plans .appro\ed by the conc.emed authorities •. upon which the complatnanl could avall the loan faclllty by lh!' banks for_th-
purpose or gelling ftnanc!I facility to purchase her dream shop In the said project of Accused Company. 13. That the complainant had glw
lhe payments of Installments lrom lime to time as and when called by the ,Accused Company, Its directors and othqr olliclals, as per th
torms .ind conditions of the said agreement. 14: That II is further submitted I t the Ac used Compan had Issued the. receipts an
ckno3edgment against the said payments PX t~ complainant. It Is pertln.ent to mentloh here_ that t e accuse perso s a recelw a
amoun or Rs. 1 37 • ~upees F'ourteen Lacs Thirty Seven 'Thousand Eight Hundred and Fifty Only) from t e complalnanl -prior t
execute lhe abo1ementloned a raement (ANNEXURE·B s ecificall inentlonl e Sho No. A-125 1 m!QCII,_ erealfer"'lne-s•,u-
agreement was execl.lled In res ect o sa s QJl._,.Whlch was arbJ.~~i;J;\:!Ll,lled ~md Intimated lo the .complainant In the year ~ a
mentioned 1n the following paras. 15. That It Is pertinent to mention here thai"trcreTii{~1rn'f."'lne""iliccUs-e-d·coll1fleny ~
s~irl'.11fmani'lealre paymentrelatlng to raft construction from the complainant,- on one Han8whlcli means that the plans haw bee
appro1Ed. to the Accused Company, by the concerned authorities bul on the other hand the Accused Company kept the complalnant I
cfark In relation to the approved plans so that loan could be facilitated et the behest of the cqmplelnant ·from the bank/ fin.anclaf lnstllutlor
Copy of the letter dated 20th July 2007 Is annexed herein along with the comRlelnant for the kind perusal or this Hon'ble Court a
ANNEX\JRE·C. 16.Thal pursuant to the execution of the ·Agreement the Accused Company failed to pro\lde the approwd sanction wan an
due to non availability or !he approved sancllon plans.of the project, .Qie complainant could not get/ evall the loan/ finance facility om t~
bank or oilier hnahclal lnslllulions II 1s also worth mention here that the complalnanl 1,1de letter dated 3rd No11;1mber1 2008 requested th
~ccused Company lo II for booking of c'!mme'rclal space In the s11id~roJec,!.,. Copy of !he letter dalicl 03, 1_ 1.2008 Is annexed herein aloii"
w1lh the comolalnanl ior lhe trnm"ITTii'Dsal or !his Hon'6Te courl as AN EXURE•D. 17, That there was a complete silence on the pert of th,
Accusod Company or other accused persons to respond to the c;omplalna~t•s abow request letter dated 03.11.2008. but the Accuse,
Compan~ after a ee,!iQd of -four months informed Jberc9Jl)Ji,alnent thro1.19h cocrespondeo~e dateo 30.Q3,200~tl\<;1t the construction of~
abDw s~,~ project IsTn"lulls\iilng encl tfie same Is likely to be completed and It fucther·1nforztuu:!.lbllLt of 3rd Floor of the sah
nro/ect Is ,n progress and th~ Accused Company further Informed tho complainant that the area res'er-.ed for the complainant at - 01
0 Grciund Floor was allotted to the complainant on pro\lslonal basis and sub eel to cha 9.e . t the I ·e of necessary approvals or during th,
r.o co s rue og. e on e o ·e comp a nan t a now I e bulldlng plans h~ been epprow DA, ana•au~
:iiithoMe'sffiimiFo're lhe new number rese1Vad for the complainant was 8•167 on upper Lobby Lawl fileasurjag approxlmalel~ 26!) S9...E.U
Su er Area on the Plot No. 13 A Instead of s ace no. A-125 measunng a prox. 595 SQ. Ft. of Su er Area on Plot no. 13-8. Copy ofth1
taller dated 30.03.2009 s annexed herein.along wllh the complai11an or t e lcin perusa of this on e ourt as ANNEXIJRE•E, 1B, That I
was ror the first time when the accused company has informed the complainant about the sanctloni approval Qf construction plans by th1
concerned authority. 11,!s slated thaUha.Ac..c.u.~~paoy kept the complainant In dark or mlsr!!prasented the compralnarn 1111 the-re~·
g! lellor dated 30th March .2009 by the comelal,r;J.;!~. That upon receipt of the said notlcl'I elated 30th March 2009 the complalnan·
;ipproac:ned the Accused Company and to the abow namad accused persons, who are/were dlrector/s and officials of the accuse(
~ompany for clarificatlon of terms In re_spect of .t~e. said notice then the Accused- Company, It;; dlrootora, representatlws .and officlall
insisted lhl'I com~ant to acce I the terms unc6ndltlonall , mentioned In the said letter of the Accvsed Company, JI Is rurthar pJ!rtlnent I<
111e11tlon here that wit ou any opt on in an ; e CO"Jplalnant a to accept t e sa erms o e Accused'company es' the .complalnen
had ln~sted her and her family's lire lime sa\ing of their hard ea ed n:,oney. 20, That thereafter as desired and directed by t~e Acou§eC
Company, , s rec ors, epresen a 1ws an o 1c als, the. complainant a o se il'lettar dated 07th April 2009 to the Acc!/.2!!? Coi:npan>
mnnllonlng about the mealing held with company orticl!!IS and the details about lhe changed ,pay,nenl plan wfifuh liowewr was again new1
Wl .:.0,
111Ip://delh1110llce.ser~rpeopte.comltir\'.llbtemp/Repor1Vie'Mlr.aspx
3 ..
I
� ·-· . ·- - · � - _ __ _._. . . . . ·- - .
·· · · •- : · L
67
7125/2014
.. UnUUed :ag� __
:.ckn�wledg ed by the accused com pany. Copy of_ ihe_ teller dated 07.04.2009 is annexed herein alon g wiihq the complajna'lt
,
for the kin
p erusal of this Hori'ble Court as ANNEXURE,F. 21 . That on. ,umbar-of P.ersonal meetin gs and verbal re _uests , In . contlnuanc.a of �;�:---:--
!1
sed Com p an)' and re �uest,� ,, : ·. "� : · t,
c9mmur-ication dated 30th March 2009, the com p lainant further seRt a letter dated �th Ap�l �009 to the Accu ; ,
:iiJ'a,
lhd Acc!J!;ed Company to change the location from B-167 on the U pper L a-.el J!,ggr.,.� Rol@a y Inn, Ma yur Vlhar, New Deihl, a� per th _ . : >: ,;: ;!-> , �
cvnant nllolmant. by the Accused Corncan)l. to the other iocallon oo otQU,!ld ftool..9.!.Jm.1m�or.1tlnantal Hotel, Mayor Vlhs.r., )b�ca ��9p . t h - · :---: ·%;Ji,.\�·.
,
, complalroarol had Initially hooked the Shop no. A-125 al the Plot No. 1 3-8 I.e. !,r)tercontlnantal at Grou�d Floor, In the said p ro e.<?t._ Co i,, }'., � - ;/':
._ _ 1-;
$',* �
lhe letter dated 14.04.2009 is annexed herein along wlth Ifie com plalnt for � e kl l'! d p erusal of thls Hon ble Court as ANNE)Q.JREpt�, ,22_.- , �:·:If 1 <
,.,,wa\Qr on personal meetings and discussions and during the meeting with lhe officials of the Af?cused Com pany , the com /?lnant � C-�1}
oflerod arid p roposed by the Accused p ersons to take the allotment of shop no. A· 61 Instead of allotment of 8-1 67, without � . � fluth\-.. ;;:,:�, '
r.ondltion of the Accused Company. 23. That in conllnuanc:e or the p ersonal meetings 'ilia
discussion the complainant \Ide Its 1 �Elr,, �at,e �.:.;:':f:c '°'!...
....1.,1 1 h May. 2009. staled that Shop No. A-.61 was \erbally offered by the Accused company on Lob Floor on 8th May, 2009 Inst i!·�ti;:11 ·'1<1.-, ' cr/>J{;
• �llolhlenl or 8·1 67 on upp er lobby are tne com plah1anl conJJrmad' ana ag reed or s op no, A-61 , as p er the new scnedule of pay-l!l!!t:::?��
riientioned in Ifie same teller. 2't.4'H�thll--ColldO'ct•c1f'tl'i's"'A�d ►p ersons:S-� ant had put the wrbal assurances ofti,:;..:;=-::=;;.-- ,
1\c:cused persons In a wtitten manner by p u(tlng the dellberaUons of the meeting In the said letter dated 1 1tn May 2009. 11 ls further state
y g p
that I11e relevant extract ot the said letter dated· :11th or May 2009 Is extracted herein below:•. We hereb a ree for Iha sho A -61 ·and woul :
like 10 make the pay ments In the below mentioned schedule, lh!s is our humble re quest that the C(!m pany should p ro\lde I.IS with th
g pp
lollowin ancl a ro\es our p a y ment schedules: • a. The sho p allotted 10 u � le A-61 on the lobby Is the final allotme,nt w,th tha -a pp row
p lans and mnps clearly mentioning the sho p location In the com pany's final approvad plans, In any circumstances, company will not chang
tl-\e tocalion of the shop. b. Conva y ance deed Is lo be executed immedlatel y with offer of possession In our fa\Our. c. Peym enl Schedule:-
Rs 10 lakhs- 25/05.2009, ii. Rs 05 lakhs • 2�:Rl1l9.lli . Rs 05 lakhs- 25.1 2.2009. Iv. Rs 0 5 lakhs • 25.02.2010. v . Rs 05 akhs 25, 0A,�01(
Balance on7ilier"d'Fposs"esslon:"'a!"We-"are e'iiciosmg a cheque no�!rf79'orRsf07oo.ooo1- (Rvp�es Ten L.ios t)nly) lo Ge p resented onl
when abo',e co�Blff8'iis"'linndp'rowd by the company anti sallhnl1n-writing-and"gi'Xl1no us before 151h May 2009 Co py of !he letter date-
as
1 1 . 05.2009 Is annexed herein along \9lth"the-camplafnt1oHhe•kind'p"ercT"s"af"of1nis'Rofi'oleCourf �NE;,a:JRE=H. 25. That throug h Its letle
aated 1 1th May 2009 the com plalnanl re q uested the accused p ersons lo confirm ltiat the Shop Allotted to her I.e. A·61 Q n lobby Floor wa
6nal aHotmenl with approwd plans and maps clearly mentioning the shop locetlon In accu.s ad comp;my's final app roval plans end with 1
confirniahon that the Accused Com pany shall not chan g o the location or the shop. It was fl.Jrth11r req 1,1asted to the Accused persons t,
corofirm 1hr1l Con-.ey anc:e Dead shall be executed immedla tely with an offer of possession In fawr, of l� e com plainant. The datalled p ay mer
schedule was also mentioned In the said leller and a Cheq ue was also enclosed bearing n�8178 ror a_rt' amo11nt of Rs,1 0,00 lacs h
0
Im.our of the Accused Com p any with the condlllons mentioned In th � said leller. Because . II was th, condllton, vpon the accused p erson:
that the accused com pany will present Iha said c h.e que only when all the conditions mentioned In Ilia sald letter are approvad In writing b:
the Accused Company . It is p ertinent to mention here that the conditions or the com p lainant were �utomatlcally a pp rowd by the accuse,
nernons at the \ery moment when the Accused Company presented the said cheque for ancashment In terms of tha said teller. 26. Th,
,.;de loller dated le May 2009, the Accused •Com pany Informed the com plainant that the Accuse d Com pany has pro\lslonally reserw
Space No.A-61 on lobby le\131 measuring 395 S q. Fl. of Su p er Area on the plot no. 13 B et an a ggreg ate value (Basic Sala Price) of Fs
1 .os. 1 6.875/- (Rupeei. one crore I\Q lacs slxleen thousand eight hundretl arid sewnty fiw only) Instead or s pace no, 6•167. It ls pertinent t•
menlio'1 here that in the said teller the Accused Company had s p eclficall y ·manlloned that Iha oom plalnant Is bound to com pl y with all th
lerms and conditions of the Agreement date� 1 �th April,J007laxec:uted be\ween the com plalrlant & Accused Com p any. As mentlorie:
abow lhal neither In the said Ag reement there was - any ifi'tri ron of the Preferentlel L�n..;.Qb @m es lo be ilPP.Ucable lo aase..of.lbi..
complainant nor in Iha leller dated 18th May 2009. But, the same shows the hel ghi-&.....mag nltude of the fraudulent tr.insacllon$ carried oi.
l;y Iha accused persons to clieal any one. Co py ori(l e letter dated 18.05.2009 ls annexed herein along with the com plaint for the kin,
1)erusal of this Hon'ble Court as ANNE�Rl:·I. 27. That the com plainant stales that \Ida letter date� 1 8th May. 2,009, the Accuse,
Com p any mentioned only the Basic $ale Price by quoting an amount of Rs 1,05, 16, 615I• (Rupees One Crore Flw lacs Sl:dee11 Thousan•
1,ght Hundred and Se\enty Fi-.e Onl y ) for the s p ace no. e:51 on the lower lobby In the said pro) ect. ll ls lurther p ertinent to mention here tha
th11 Accused· Comp any nowhere m11nllonad that todhe allotmen1 of A-Bi any Preferential Location C �argas would be liable io .bll borne b:
0
the complaln11nt. 28. Thal the Accu:;ed Com p any , Its directors. officl;ils or anyone else In this world cannot change the Basic Sale Price c
!1-te Shop In Question by extraneously oemandlng any ·P.refarentlal Localfon Charges• aodad In addillon to any Increased price In relalfol'I I<
Basic Sale Price. It is no Um lY llle�al b'LagaiasL.&..contra iy-la..tb.a..lE!®s..&..«.QA.d.lililn�-oi.lbe..hgr.e.eJXI.ElO.! e ad 12.04,200i between tht
com lalnilnl and the Accussd Com pan . II is stated that the said conduct is ex:fade end _ ag ainst the ·prlncl p les. of nntural J ustice end ht
Accused oersons canno c m more han tho amount orfglnally agreed batween:tha parties. 29. That es par the said letter dated 18th Ma)
2009 lhe Accused Com pany clewrly . arbitrarily and fraudulently increased lhe Basic Sale Price without any rhyme or reason, In the case o
the cornplalnant. The said conduct Is an Ille g al, arbitra ry and 1.0ld ab-lnltlo conauot on the part of the Accused peraons. 30. That In )dew o
· tl-tti abova cited facts and circumstances the com plainant tiad no option In hand and had to write a letter dated 081-h Jt.ne 2009 to the
Accused Company and In the said teller ths com plainant confinned and Informed the- Accused p arsons !hat the Shop no. A-61 on the
Lobby Le-.,gl measuring 385 Sc.. Ft, on Plot No. 1 3,8 Is finally allolled to the complalnaiit by the Accused Com p any. It was further informed
0 to the accused persons lhat lhe Accused Company had encashed the said che q ue for en amount or Rs.1.0,00,000/· (Ru;:iees Ten Lacs
Only ). enclosed by the complainant with the letter dated 1 1th May 2009, without any objections and lm plledly accepted the terms of the
letter dated 1 1th May. 2009 which lanlamouni ··l(l acceptance of the lerms of the p ayment schedvle g lwn by the complainant lo the
�ccusad com pally along with other conditions of the same letler. Co py._ of the letter dated 08.06,2009 is annexed herein along with the
com p laint for the kind p erusal of this Hon'ble Co4 rt as ANNE)Q.JRE•3. 31. Thal \Ide !alter oafetr8Eh June 2009, the complainant also
informed the accused persons that there has been· some error In caiculatlon at the end of accused com pany res p ect of the agg reg ate p rice
ot the space in the said p roject of the Accused Com p any . The corrip lalnant f\Jrther Informed the accused p ersons that Iha terms &
� onditlons of Iha ori g inal �ho p Buyer's Agreement ne\.llr changed whlle offering the new Shop � p ace co the complainant, as co·nfirmad by
lne Accused Company In its latler dated 18th May 2009, and therefore, Iha originaf rate of the s pace In the said project as per the tenns _of
Iha Shop Buy ers A g reement Is Rs,24. 1 251. (Ru p ees Twenty Four Thousand One Hu l')drad and Twenty Fiw Only) p er s q . ft, It Is -further
staled Iha! tho shop No,A-61 o'ii'"to6Ey Lewi Is the area of 395 s q . ft. and as p er the catc vlallon or Iha said s p ace,· rate 1ixed und·er the
a g reement. become lis.J§�29.375/- 1&, oees Ninty Flva Lacs Twenty Nine Thousands Three Hundred and Sewnty Flw Only). 32. Toal as
Pet the letter dated 18th May 2009. the Accused Com p any Intentionally with malafida Intentions calculated Rs.1 05 16,865/- (Rup ees One
Crore Fio,e Lacs Sixteen Thousand Eig ht Hundred and Sewrlty Flw Only) Instead eLBs.Jl_5.._?,!b,3Lw.illiup ees Nl�e tVFIW'iaos iwenly nfne
tho usands three hundred and sewnt y fiw only) for a gg re g ate basic sale pllce, for an area or 395 s q. ft of shop no. A-61 allotted to the
hllp:i1dathlPOlico.ser1.eri:-oople.cetr/firw.ible rn;:/Repor1\liemr.as px - 4/1
·'
r l..
·I
t
�t -: -'
r
.l . . . . _ _ _ __ _ · . . - - - - -- · · · -
• ' 68
. l • •·•-.,••�
• ,.) . ':--,_
7/:!F/20 14 • Ulllllled Pag e
cornplainar,t . 33 . "Thal in re ply lo the notice dated 081" June 2009 of the com plalnant, the accus etl,l ;i ersons Issued � letter �ated 7th J\11 , . ,:
·\ "- ' .
"i; : ,/''?Q�
..-,;-. < : .• ;;-�--;-�
:>>i' . �\
....,. 1,.,
! Y
2009 to the complainant wherein the accused p ers ons ha\e alle g ed all the facfs contra ry to what h�s actua l trans p ired In re�lll ·an VfJ.••-· y 9
,nforl'1P.d to the accused persons by the com plainant \ide her letter dated OB!h June �009. In \heir letter dated 7:o'e
,z.th July '. ?009 )9 It (:.- .\ -:
�. ·\��_'.tl
�
1,o,.:pl,io:-Ian1 lhe acc J�ed persons wrongly contendea that the com pf;ilnant had a g reed to pay. th8 P reference 'a.lliID:;. G.harg�s...e �:•. 'f
'
g c:
/1.,--* �
p p
01,ni � ncicd by the Accus ed Com anv.. 11 Is ertinent lo men � � y
here ! el onl 'Wlll,0flf"tnrontro .:,n1 � �x plolt the com p lalnent the c 11s r�; - :
_ f.
1
,
rn;rsons tur11ler alle ged that the com �nt•h-acl"agi'eedTo" pay::.Bs..1..0ful6,.!!l5/.(Rup ees On� crore l=£w Lacs slxtean· ToQu� a�_ l§ lg l-�. �
J
,-
!
Hundre d and Sewilly""FIW"Oi'lf 9) :o th�ccus ed Company and the same _ ! ncjt,1de.s l !tE!. P.referance-t.9caUon·0harg es In addltlon� I)� 8a);_J..,. .• .;..r 1�
s11Ie Pr.ca. 11 Is further submitted and p ei11nent to riientionfiere tRafrrom the date of enterin g lnt�; the a greement, the term of l(s�<;-- ��J.:.- ,r. \
;;t.' ,§:}'I,'
b
;:irice and the Preferc-nce Locallon Charges. under the a greement were . speclfically and separately defined In une quivocal le �._ l};, n.;;y �-� :
_g
reiterated tha t the aus o o s a d. l j � J;?
er�� calion Char g es wa�ewr a pp ll?� R t.� -�- ."..
1?..9 .!h� C '?l"!l e@ .l�� l Is further s ubmitted that lnl·th--�
retter da led 071h July 2009. the accused pers onsnewrwhfs p ereo tneTmposftlon cif the said p reference location cha rg es In the cas 11 - I
complainc!nl. Copy or the letter dated 07.07.2009 is annexed herein along with the ,complalnt for the kind p erus 13 I of this Hon'ble Court a
A NNEXURE-I< . 34 . That at the end of the letter dated 07.07. 2009, the Accus ed Com pany threatened the com plalf) anl, In ex.pres s words, I
pa t Rs 1 1 , 95,688/- (Rup ees Ele..q n Lacs Nint y Five Thousands Six Hundred and Eighty Eig ht Only) Immediately and further threatened th
complainant to face U-e unpleasal'\tness , ln case of ripn p ayment or Rs 1 1 ,95,688/·(Ru peas Elewn Lacs Nlnty Fl-,e 1novsands Six Hundre
and E ig hty E ig ht On! ,) to lhe Accus ed Com pany . · 35: That lhe complainant IAde letter dated 1 9th No\oember 2009, fvrther s e �t a detalle
letler cum notice to the Accus ed Comoany and s p ecilfcall y denied the _ alleg allon� made by the Accused Com p any. It ls S !Jbmltted tm
I 11roug h the said leuer cum notice to the Accusetl Company , the com plainant cal!sli up on the Accused Company lo wlttidraw their lellE
datotl 07 July 2009 and further re q ues ted to the accused p ersons to recti fy the wrong caloulallon of Basic Sale Price ,ide therr )etter date•
1 !lth & 1 9th Ma y 2009 and further re ques ted to hand 01.er the copy of the a ppl'Qwd & s a rctroned plans with the . s p ecification of the Sh01
tioacing No. A-61 , allotted lo lhe 'complalnant and In this way the complainant \ide letter cum notlc'e dated 1 9. 1 1 .2009, reiterated 1111 he
r.onlontlons and commur,Jcations : to the accused p ersons. Co p y,,oHI]! ieltec <lllm.:.Jl9.l!.9..B 19, 1 ,1 ,20.!) 9 Is annexed herein alon g Y!i!�
£.?m p liant or the kind perus al if this Hoo'b!e Court as ANNEXURE•L. 36. Thal the accus ed persons throug h accused com p any !hen sent 1
rep ly . daled 25th February �1.Q...I_Ube saliftetter- Cum-Notice dated 19th .N owmb8r 2009 pf the com plainant, wherein · the accuse,
persons ve�eval'ly cenled the s ubmission and contentions of the com plainant to a\Old their lla'blllly under the contract and without c/Olnt
equity start seekin g equit y by demanding balance amounl Illegall y without com p letin g 'the project within the stfpulated period and furthe
tned to cheat by char�ing alleged Preference Locallon C,harg es from the complainant In an Illeg al . and arbltraiy manner. 37. That 1111 (date
11,e com p lainant had made a pay ment of Rs 45. 88, 594/- ( Rupees forty Five Lekhs Eig hty Ei g ht Thousand Fl\13 hundred and Ninety Fou
0
onl y ) due to fals e re prese nlatlons and wron g commitments of the accused p ersons In lleu of the said Basic. Price of sho p number A·61 If
the said project ol the Accused Company through the accused persons . 1t Is further p ertinent to menllon here that the accused persons
with out considerin g Its own conduct made Its opinion· o\er the status of the com plainant by p utting the words that "It app aari; to !ht
Accused Com p any that th8 com plaina nt do nol hava the s ufficient money to ,fulfil Its contractual llablllUes end to pay lo the Accusec
Company." ft Is submitted In this reg ard that it Is itaslc princi p al of law that the p erson who seeks e q uity must do a qulty, therefore, -lhl
acr.used company failed to p erform Its own res ponslbllltles and harshl y attacked the self res pect and reputation of the com plalnant. 38; Toa
,n lhe s aid rep ly datec 25th Februa ry 2010. the accused p ersons denl,ed the co.ntentlons and submission or the complalnant and fvrthe
deman"ed the said alleged preference Location Charges from the com plainant In .an Ille g al and arbitrary manner. It Is further submitted tha
the accused persons 'la\e .stoop ed down tci\liIs conduct due to a huge amouiiiha\lng 6e en alrea cypaTd. 6y \he com ptalifa'hr.-16' lh!
acc·(Js�l!d"1:ompany un er t e sa o"'acireei"iehT'and·ire-eoh··c11yUie -Accused Compa oy__b.aw,tes.eM.c!Jfs)i,gnlstoiorfell on f!s oWri"term$"'lhE
�r ;ame money Inv.isled by the complainant In the p ro eel o lie accused com p any . Photoco py of the rep l y letter dated 2t.o2'72Q'IU 1.s
o"llerfiltialon g v�!fi tlie com plaint for the kind p erus afoTThlsRon'bTe"'Court as :A:ll/l'JE)i[.!Rf:-f>;C3g; That et the and of Iha repl y datec
�02.20 1 0, the Accused Com p any further ag ain threatened the complalnant lo either pay an -alleged amount of Rs 32,99,062/· (Rupees
Thir!y Two"tacs Ninet;· Nine thous and and Sixty Two Onl y ) or In case ol non-p ay ment of the said alle g ed amount to tennlnate the sale
allotment/ reservation of shop no. A-6 1 at plot No. 13B or the s aid p roj ect a nd also to forfeit the amount to the extent of 15% of the total selij
price alon g with holding charges and interest on un paid installm8nls by the complainant (whloh :WIii siphon off a portion inere than alle ged
1 5% rrom the p aid amount of thB com plainant } from th8 amount paid tlll date by the com plainant. 40. Toal the accused· com P-BnY, firstrY.
. c; ��Q!_a_lnant tiy showin g ros y plcture,s.,and s econdly oheeted b y..MUla.gJ.U-l�g@ i'6"lfie com pla!iiiffifori"iirlce
�rmat°!]�'sTeairel an8 was assured lo be,!!;P.�Lp rice wlth·reSP.,�I to otp er �sJ2!1l�neatecJ•t�e-�� nt
asper
on lhe terms ol rates as lfiere"wif�trge"'dillerence rn pil'c es. Photocopy onfie p nnted fonnat of�he p rice fsannexed herein alon g with the,
com plaint tor the kind p erus al of !fi1s-Aori'ore-co'O�XU RE-N . 41. at there Is cheati n g �d fr<!,ud O (l.lbg., R.a.d...ol.tb.e..�ceused..
person. when lhey Iss ued the first demand letter to the com lalnant containin g assurances tfle'iiccused persons about COIJS ID,/.cJ!o11.t0-
b�� once.Bl,a,us].�"ap�o'!�'cl-me proJec was 10 e de iwred · 3.Q..rn ont s . e. on or oefore Jan�a ry 2� 1 0. Sfnce the b e ginning of
..
11ie proi acl and tfll today no detalrs were p ro'.idad lo the comp alnant or to e o er uyers o e ro ec Sylfie accused No. 1 to 9 and atiio
failed _to � ro�d�d lhe a pp rowd plans In s p ite of comp lalnar,t's re peated communlc?IIOns, which was/ls mandatory to avail loafl from any
financial inshtullon. 42 . .]lat the accus ed p ersons ha\fl mala �de intentions since b_e g lnnln g��B�...E.Qillln!.Re1.d.fraud.&.cheatlng with
0 the com plainant and other buyers and the s ame coOld be ] uaged ifom the followf�g sub-p aras :..annat the accused p ersons firstly started
collecting mone y I f! the name of their proj ect from the market without halo!ng any poi.session end a pprowd plan/s .and concealed (hese .
mal arial facts from the com p lainant and other buyl(l rsyii d shclwn ovar 1 .00,000 S q uare Feel of p remium shopping located within a sing le
l wo-building 5 star dalu, e hotel with 350 rooms�at Iha accus ed company had In .the first Jns.tance shown their tie-up and agreement
wilh Hotel Crown Plaza bul later on chan g ed with Hofel Hollday lrin, Hotel Intercontinental and then' also svalled tile. certificates In the heme
of, Ho1 e l lnterconlinentat but tlll date none o[ the abc.\e mentioned hotel Is e\13r' 99;erallonel In the p roJeci of .the a �.fl...£.9J!!P...il ny ,and
recently In the month' of;6;',!gusl-Se lamber 2011 on8 hotel Dou6Ia . res slarteait' t e s"eme ace n1s racfis1iseifsuffiolenttoefi.ow'ine.
-Mea(�n g &"rfalTcl"on !�rt o accuse p ersons ue c.-ra se y comm I ng cons rue on of otel lr'ltercont!nental In their p rofect and further
cheatin g & fraud on the part or accusetl p erson� is als (? J udg ed . from the facJ .that ttu r eccused com pany falle d to Issue en l(J.�.c:.lo..llil
. .
auyers lnclydln !l..!.t!LJ._q.Q.lRlalQ a]!J91�Q..�S s!on o,u�dx_ �E��-� sl6n P.f.!g!j.ca_PommoQ WeaU h Games"20.f0 wfilffi'.'was Iha
�yliig ••11cb a· buge P.ricai..(m�re tbao 4 _ nieln
_ 00% wro tfie market o nce f �a_ q Yl!al. 119-L�R aJ:.11 ..m. th..
<!l Jlm!u nor the small s pace offered
by the accused com p an :, , The complarnant los t upon a 'hu g e business opp ortunity by not 'being able to op en her shop du rjn g the pe
, riod of
commo_n Wealth G am�s 2010 _and therefore s u ife re,d..a..blg•loss of money due· to false assurances of the accused company of com pletin g
p
the roiect before lhe mag, ·cal!o!l,.()f.Games 201 0. c. That the agreement in' .q uestlon was ·executed after 4 months from the date of first
recei pt of p ay ment and accus ed p ersons who were alread y awa�t11i'eir malaftc!e FnlefilWs tlierefore a va ry clawr m anner mentioned In m
hUp://da!hi Police.ser\erpeopfe.cornll'irv.Ebtemp.'Repor lViev.er .aspx
..
· ___: � · � · · - -· . . ·69n p.,.;ti"t�:"� . , I
.
r-
�J
.
-1251201.: UnUUed Page
_
�ho said agrooment that tho brochures and printed o1d�rtlslng ma lertal will not be part or agreement, which itself IS/Wjls p r� ?J
an 01fe1;1cf Qn ':"
parl of tho accused peq;ons._J3ecause, e�n prior to execution of. agreement dated 1 2.04.2007, accvsed persons 1 had collected an. am,CH "..* ;
orhs . 1 4,37,850/- (Rupees Fourteen Lacs Thirty Se\liln thous and. Eight Hundred and Fifty Only. ) frQrn the com �lainant �n the ,b�s_l�;:: �.-J. _c;: • - !
promotional brochures ano printed materials but. intention.ally mentioned at page No: 19 in para No. 46 Qt the agreemenfwJ1lc;Jl is. �- . ,(;_'!,'
undar:• 46 "ii Is expressly agreed between the parties that any adwrtls em ents , brochures,. hand bllls lssveli by the Com P911Y. �oe�y ot•,fc;,;,"('� c
Iha basis or this Agreement wilh the Company. The Company Is only bound by the terms and conditions as Incorporated In \yrltlt[(l_[!:!int.'J -::. .
-.;:>�
,.:;:;-9'1
I�
Aqrcr.menl and s igned t,y lhe Directors of the Corripsny or any official authorized by the Board of Directors of tho company, In this We)t±:.:;;:;;--
ar.cuaecl persons tried to cheat Us innocent buyers by formulating and imposing such unfair conditions In Its agreements with bwers of 111
a
proj11r.1 who waru already bound lo the accused company hal.!ng paid huge am.ount of monay only on the public face and reput�o.!1.Qf 1
M.cu ;!!,d coni e_any wilho;1 t halAng any iots ?f s �oubl of fraudulent l i:!!enllons of.£!1]�t1rig*by"�he;!C.£,�� B.a@�_....Toal oes@es I
'ii6o�manRonod·corramon the accuse1l. '"P. ers6ns also 1mposeosewral"cWGr one slcieo conclffions to s illla IY. mo� ._(!ofaj_f__Q.9!!,PIIIO
'l'i\ilS6!lticfon"ttsbuye'ra.wiilcn1scre;ii' . T�]Qs e,'.o(aomiil;�nloii,or.ine'.:ilccT1s.0.8;c:offip_gQ�ti:tbJs.�c:afiar recel\lng/collectlng hu
ariio"l'mia a so in resp��ll . baJ\c.._21Jt�- �f t,h e_bµy• The earlier deliberation on the ele1J1enls and extent of abuse m alielt-clee'r ti
acr.O's!!Tf1l"o1'lrcriWh1lte'"B'een grossl9'"'aous1ng llwlr doriflnant pos itions and that too against a wloerable s ection of consum ers , who hqW Ht
ahllily lo act or organize against s uch abuse. The strict action against the accused parsons musl bEI" iaken and exemplary cost mvst
impos ed on lhe accused pars ons ror their blatant abuse of domlnanca, e. Thal the abusive pracllces referred to abo\e haw . b een cam
wU h the object or unclue economic gains and business pro�ls . On other hand, the con�rstenl: practlce of e)(ecullng UIU'c!ir conditions - a
holdil\g out ratse representations and exploiting t h a d�f�.Jl.9S!tloo.ceg be seen from lhe �onduct or the accused persons ae det;ill•
above in this complain! which are certainly isgrawlmg rectors . The conduct of the accusecl persons In abusing Its dominant Pos it!,
rr,Quiros to be taken vary seriously and thus . thls"H6n'61eCouifts reQuired to adopt a deterrent -approath so that recurrence or such con du
1s s lopped. I. lha t the accus ed· person changed the actual Drawlng13 & Plans, w lch We[e ·.shown to the buyers and pres entlyf on sl
e�rylhing is ofilere'i\l"an'd. "'tfie • -conslruclion . . s comp e e y 01 erenl on site. g.,.. Tha'i7iie- accuseci pe'rsons assOrel: 'fo tl
purchaser/in\.estorlbuyers that t�ey · are' comrnltled to��be(ore"conimonwe�h games but )hey failed to complete their proje.ct prl
to the. Common"Wi!mtl1"ea'tl are ore e arbitraril bound the buyers after raceil.ing huge· amounUs .much prior (rom the executlt
of their one sid�.!!JTe'"tmiIB o · e ll�\hat.,.lbe.terms & conditions menlloned in their agreement qre completely fao,Qring to tt
accused co .!P..
ecause.,. th�)' �a.l)! P�U�C. the possession to the buyer/lrwa.s_lOIS within the stipulated period and due lo th
;igreomenl. no'ooiJy may crearehurdle in their prR19ct <1nd in fact. the agre ement" In q4esllon was made one s ided on order lo a\Qld ar
liligalion o°l"'hare1rsnre·11i-br'iifiy'noionous�dfuyer. II is als o pertinent lo mehllon here that the complalnant raised some objections <
0
the few points fa\Ouling lo the accused compsny ti:efore the represenlallw of the accused company, who refused to amend the temis
conditions mentioned In the agreement on the pretax! that they cannot changed the agreement parson to person and If they wlll sta
.imendlng il person lo person. In that cas e they can never complete the project and there wlll be no uniformity among -<he buyers of tt
1iro) ec 1 and therefore. Iha complainant had no choice except to the sign the ;igreemanl glwn to her, which wa� printed In a shape of bookl•
and In a cyclos tyle manner by lh,!I accus ed pers ons ,on beh aj[_of accused company .and by lha( time the complainant had alrea\1y paid
hune payment of more thR 14 lees to lfie accused person No. 17o9'."'li. Toal the accus ed person further cheated their buyersllni.e1t0rs c
"'
the terms _or Pr_e (erentlal ?Ca 1on 9.ll,��{g:J;.4g�an�'a"�itrariw ci'an�!WD�.£�.i;,!1�� • size and number 9f Jl:!.e lr shops/area and th(
extra ng more·amoun for a smaller space other than th8...!!£9!!:.§.PJA..C.e&tiii(i¼a9tll.!!..i!.!l12Pn.aCllieJlme or execution ff the agreement, I, Thi
I e accuse persons ma e I e wrong commitments · tci attract the bo11i!fide purchesers/buyers/lnwstors and then i'alleo to fulfill tr
cbliga�!?n �O';'!�d��tz.11afid-? b,!!Y�.rs a11d.al§.Q...(fille_d_to.coroplete,tbe,proleclwittllo the ass�irf¼.q_ stJP-ulated pe.rlodof30 months fiom7 n-
-Jlily2007. when the accused persons demanded the . amount from the buxers on the ·p...r.etoxt..of "Raft Foundation''. . J . Thal the :acc[lse
persoM ��a ng ect"1h·errotlli"llir1ct·and's·obal�decnliecoi'ilmercra1ai'eaorstngie project 1a
a�_?_h�_n�_:I ��-�-�e In _t��-�llferent p10�
or subdl\\s1on arbllranly and unllalerally. K. lhat1he complainant no'« realizlng tifa'rll,e. accusacf comeaiifwas ,nQf.'.eollliei=empowereac
auffionzeol'oc6iis'fiict'1heslngieproject on the Plot No, 1 3 A & B a�gecfinlhelr Brochures and meetings and all this rosy picture
.:7e/e'clesrgne •n order to extrac money ffo111 tn�bl�o"io"1'°�1rlfiair project on a higher rate. I. That lhei ac.cu�ed parsons fella
lo clfsclose earlier that the accused company was not entitle. empowered or authorized to construct the single pro)eot en the Plot No. 1 3 ,
& 8 a s alleged I n their B rochures and maelingsJ!l the starting to lhe1��.2!!,.� , . ..bJE�.l!;8 ?ua t o _!!11: ,,,�!!li.C!!:9P.ttt1..4.�9f th,
_
accus ed pen;ons lnwstor/buyer/�rchas,er suff�o�.� �l3j)Y,,.�.!!JJn$l!.IJJ.19JLJ.IQB proJ�c�..£!.�Q.\!�J?g�offs 1 in_,., Thal there was no sucl
llfand otillets•otbTa"'l
'.
1®J::.�:.ifor.JLQ!.e s ere assoc[:iTedln Iha proJegLall<lJ/1� ccu�eopersons lntentlon�lly with the malafide lntentlont
mel\lloned the name of brands with their projec s aitlie'intlai stage to attract (he lnwstors and therefore, pres ently no such allegeo name c
brands exis ts !here which again constrlutea fraud execulad by the accus ed company on Its gulllble Investor/buyer/purchaser. n That there I:
\ery much discrepancy In the prices/fates as per print formal or the company's ·1 eaffet and s old al the higher rate to the complainant Ir
comparisons of other buyers, lo whom the accused pers ons sold the area situated In the · same locatfon at the much less er rates Ir
comparison of the present complainant and the present complainant was llot aware about such type of practices by a buflder, bacays e th�
complainant had then recently shifted from lndla lo Sri Lanka and the c0mplalnant and her hus band were out or India al lhal polnl of time
and the accus ed persons cheated the complalnant on Iha terms or rates as there Is ,�ry much"dlscrepancy In the rates for the same space
0 for other buyers . o. That the accused pers ons tntenllonally not completed their pro/eel within .the strpulated period I.e. 30 months from their
firs t demand In the month of Juiy._gf)07, which must ha� slaned only after appro'd:11 of site pla n, but the accused persons· ln the Y.ear �,,Q,9
mentioned in their correspondences lfiaMfialr s1Jg PJans Jiave nowoea'ti"itpJ)"ro\'e'd•ancMhereafter�ohanged·the...lcrc-alron, area and riii'mbarof""
.
the are_il fshop allolled lo the buyers . p. lhal the accusecf"p'e·rsoril;�lritentionally""not-=pro\ided.the-appro1,13 (1,,5iteDplan UH totSay to the
i:ompla• � ant _and other buyers- despite the fact lhal the complainant repeatedly demanded the same i;lnca beginning. Photocoples of s everal
A-mails m this regard are annexed alongwith presen_t complaint fer Iha kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court as ANNE)(l)RE-0 (Colly.) q. Thal
Iha accused persons have no explanallons In respe�l of e-msils sent to the accused persons and the explanatlons ror changes In draW!ngs
nnd plans and the pres enl form or cons truction, Is: completely dlffGHtnt from the original assured plans and also failed to expl;iln that how
they allotte d the numben; after showing the site plan without ha\ing any approval ·of the same. Photocopies of the lnlllal site plan In this
regard are annexed alongwith pres ent complaint for lhe kind -perusal or this Hon'ble Court as ANNEXURE- p. r. That the accvs ed person
wrongly committed at the time or booking that thay are commllted to dellvar the posse.sslon to the complainant before the Common Weallh
Games i!nd failed to d-o so. But. Frau enll availed t a om laUon cert! ca!a· from all the rale �� departments on i:1a w.nor .!2_ the
Common Wealth Games and. t 1i; I qam� in th�o- edg� ot the compla�� allei:._ry cE.l,\IQ9��•trrom 'ffi'�O:D;'A.--�
11nder the " 0 n or j:! 0 �· " otocop!es"'SMlie ooc,lmeril�er R. TY In this regaidare anriiixe'a"'a1ol\gWlffi"-j)ra'-Wri1
inc perusal or 1hls Hon'ble Court as ANNEXURE -0 (Colly):s. That lhe con,'plalna�I able to know about the cheating &
'
hllt: lldelhipolica .ser1,'ilrpeople.com'frrv.ebte�RePortvle'Mlr.aspx 6/B
.....
· .
-: 70
. _ _: >-./·:- · _. •,
"f/25120111 UnUUed Pag �· . . ·
. .
frauds committed by accused persons from th_e docum ents a'lcl.Ued.-.Jrorn.,Jl)_e..D,D.#). under the R, T. I. Act, Its further trari�plred tha . · ,, �- •. •·
accused persons with ac tl..e connivance or eact1 other were--.a6lido·get Iha Operatlonal Licenses from the accvsed No H4 to 16 fo · ·· -: _ . \ :-'
purpose of operallng H51'el Mt�onfllientailinci•o!j,lrigRestaurant (AU DAY DINING INFINllY), l.odgln9 Facility, Loun9 (Bar.. Resta, .
Orinntal Chulney, Swimming Pool, Fitness : Center · (SPA INTERCONTINENTAL), l,.lcense for operating
T
nil
I � �/S HC
·
'. ,
.' .-.
IN E RCONTIN.ENTAL. Firr.'I Ins pection Report/N.O.C, from Head-Quarters Delhi Fire S er-Ace, New Delhl-1 10001. Co:npletlo fe.rtlfji;ale ·
DeU1I U1ban Arts Cominlss lon. t. That there Is clear cut extortion In the hidden _way on th� pretext of . c;lema11dlng en
1 0. 00.00D/-approxfmately as PreferenlJal Locallon Charges (P,L.C.) from the complainant. despite the fact that the ace e�.JjYl_; · · ·
,
-:�t��<ah . · _ _ .,.f
_
are/were not entitle fo1 demanding the same. u. �at lho accused persons must haw availed h1,1ge mon11tary · benefits fr�� .
�
deperlments and huge subsidies on banker lmestment's Interest due to s howing the fake completion or project with 1he acllw connll.!li'Tt--
sevaral Goll(. officials. which may lnciude an amount _sowral hundred lac:.· rupees cheating of rewnue with the Go�. & Banks _bE1sldes
wrongs'TomTTiifn1 e'/,'ls'"�';innhecomi5faln,mian7otii"el}ulers� i#at""as�per··ra1:ennnoWJeage-onne complainant it fvrtheri;ame In
knol)jte8ge11iaiinficcl'fs'ed"pel'Son's"'iii'oaes operanql Is s eine to chea\ the other· buyafS/lnwstors or other projec\5 pal'ldlng or pqnlln
afongwflh lhe project in which present complalnanl paid her valuable amount to the accused persons. w. Toa! the Qccused p_ersons ,
adopted the same policy In thei�Dwil!'t�,fil:lOL.lA-Pm,iect and bifurcated total area In two parts and also cheated the persons,
in�sled In the s aid another project of (he accused persons and us ed to s hift the lnwstors/buyers from 11s one proje1,t to another by Sa!
lhal their new project Is much more valuable In comparisons of project In which they had lnwsted. Photocopies or relevant (jocument
another project are annexed alongwith present complaint ror lh'e kind pel\!Sal of this Ho11'ble Court as ANNEXl,)RE·R (C:Qlly), x. Thal
ar.cusecl pe,sons are hablt�1al offender and therefore, they not only cheated the complainant or olf)er lnwstors/buyer but also able to get
completion certificate-before the Common we'alth Games arid cheated the Gowmment as well despite the fact that the construction v.
at s ite was ne�r completed at that point of time and no correspondence made ft respect of gl'Ang possession to the complainants , wt
crearl}• shows that the accuse� persons fa/�d, lo,B,o,TPlE!.t ec,utll 02.J0,20:1 0. �/ldeo recording dated 02. 1 0.201 0 in this regard
�
anoox ed alongWilh present complaint for the kind pel\Jsal orthrs on'ble Coort as ANNEXURE-"S ", V. That In the light of abowmenlloi
rar.ts its clearly trans pired that the accused persons In connlvance or Go-.1. O_epartment's officlals , who facllltated the accused persons l
iss ued wrong reports for their own monetary gains and against t he interest or the lnws lor/buyers and nation, which amounts to dlso�ey
1hn law with intent to cause Injury to any person with fraudulent Intent and framed incorrect document by knowing that the same will ca1
rc:.ranL1fl los s lo lho nallon. �Lc.J, ��o_ch�aling & fraud o_n t �JW�o,t:�$,!:�� p��gi:is_.,�. 1:' al the ac�used persons IJIUSl haw paid ·
bnbe to a great extent in _ The se�ral departmenls:"hs'"oi!Jciaisand stafi•persons fn order to a\6tl the benefits {or themseli.es and against ·
cornplainanl and national Interests. Hence huge monetary benefits availed due to wrongly obtaining the completion certificate fi'om the 0(
Oewlopment Authority. Delhi Urban Art Commission etc. etc. In order to s how that the project of the accus ed persons was complet
0 b!lfore Iha Common Wealth Games. a a . ihat the accused persons in order to s aw their skins and In order to cheat the bonat
1111rchasors changed the ewrylhlng on the pretext oirel.lsed-slle ,eran wnn611Mlitimatlng· to tha lnwstors/buyers "1th the ectlw connivance
Go\.! . Officials and there is clear cut cheating and frauif on thepart"ot'accus eo persons, because, there was no reason or ground to chan
the site plans and all this happened with \he actlw connivance or accus ed persons with each other. bb. That the accused persons mtsus
lheir nexus with the Go11t Officials against the b1;1')r_ers/in�s lors and ignored all the rule & regulation of allotment from lhe D.D.A . and res•
the allotted area in parts 011 the arbitrary rates . wtiich are contrary to the law of this land arid great cheating & fraud on the pa_rt o{ accus
11ers�ns. cc. That the accused persons collected · a· huge amount from wrong commitments and illegally collected money, which had be
utilized by the accused persons to bribe the Go\'\. Officials , which should ha� · been used on the project. dd. That there is recognlzal
difference in the construction of Hotel Area in comparison with shopping area and used wry Inferior material In the shopp)ng area beoa1,1
1h11 same was already s aid.by the,accus.ed,sersoo,and used \l'!IV�good quali!Y-4onslruellon material �nd superior stone on t�e flooring of t
�el .ftea:., ge.� ause tho same was let out on teas.e-by-the,,accused comp_any and Its dlrec(�rs , y1hlch E!iriounts to cheating, fraud ·a,
...�!�!§!lla,shJ�!.£nJ:li-11,P.iiJ:t�of.a.9.c_l!!l-!!S.P.ersop§...w.llh the ►oolI)Qlalnaot. ll,ls..fullhe.r. submllled thc(t this fact could be wrified by a_nyo1
ha111ng general prudence. ea. That the accused persons managed to attract Iha bonafide purch�s er and lnnocent ln�stors In a i.e
'!profe�foiial""Wiif"oecaus-e-.. llfey are doing the same business for the last s ewral years and used to threaten _ Its own bonaflc
im�stors/buyars after accepting huge money from them. B ecause the accused persons are big gu�� and habitual o!fenders and used
lhrealen by saying Iha! "thal they m ay deduct the 1 5% of the amount and no one can succeed fro.m· .lhem due lo ha\fng big legal netwo
and link & liaisons with the high class Go•. t Offictals Including Bureaucrats & Judiciary and Ir a�yone WIii try lo Indulge them or thE
\ -u
r.ompany in lfliga tlon in that case on the basis or their one s ided agreement they may contest for several yearo in courts and finany wlll n,
pay or relum any single penny 10 . thal tnwstor/buyer and further rebuked that their case will be f!nallzed· In Supr�me Court of India a_r.
S upreme Court ol lndla may not pass an order during Iha llfelime or a ny aggrlewd person. ff. Toal the complainant Is not the only perso1
who is cheated by the accused poison. But, there are· s ewral other persons, who paid !heir hard earned wloable·amoun!s to the accuse
persons due 10 lhelr wrong commitments and In this way accused person makes the se\eral persons and cheated them alst:> In the sam
� nlanner and haw made ii a business lo cheat the people. Becaus e lhe c·omplalnt b'efore the E.O.W. Qefl was ·made by sewr'al lnwstors
JJ g. That neither the accused pers ons nor the de a · nt I.e. D,D.A. and Its o clal fil.eJnte.te.tle_d. .ts>+dl1,.clo.s.e.JQ.Jb.!i.£..9.tuPJ.!!l6-an\.tbal...o-...
mlch terms �coiiamons the land for the ro eel was allotled to t e accus ed .comp.fil!Y-iIDd-'filmlY{?.S...!.!).g.JlOJlr;y_fr.amed�forJb�.Al.Cl.C.lls.er
0
any o e-.e o t e sa e o that the accused company was enlifle lo collect the money from the public without de\e!0plng the samo
or c accus e company, ils director, officials and repres entallws are paying any heed lo !he requell l of the complainant_ for P.ro\lding the
te plan to her, other relevant noting of the department officials in file or that the complete file of the accused compan>-, Toi� clearly shl:!_IW
ti"'i:ictr..e connivance of each other In order to defeat the right of the complalnanl. hh. Thal the Inferior construction In tree shopping area
which is sold to lhe buyers and using superior materiats· In the hotel area. which wlll be remain with the accused. per;ons and blfurcatln�
arid Partitioned lhe whole project which reduced the total shopping area Into two s.eparate shopping area after Inducting the lnterwnlng wall,
which will certainly not attract the good foe>tran and the wry purpose or the complefnant defeated due to the wrongs of tf-e accu�ed persons,
And Iha abo\flmenlfoned facls are sufficient lo ascertain Iha att1mllon of hls:Hon'ble Court against the accused· persons · ror the Just
adjudication of lhe matter and far Judging Ih a cheatlng & fraud on the part or the ·accus ed persons .43 That t"a accused ;iersons dlshom1stly
induced the complainant and other inwstors/buyers to part with s ubstantial amounl of nJpees and the. accused persons deliberately and
dlshoneslly did not dis clos e the reai facts to the complainant regarding the affairs/ dealings of the com pany as the accused knew that
ol herwise the complainant would not haw parted with the huge amounl. Thus the accused persom; haw committed offences -Ula 406/407
re.id with s eclton 41 5/420/10911 20·8/34 I. P .C. besides the offences committed under the pre1,<;1nllon of co!Tl.lptlon acts by toe Go-A, Officials,
; f round during ln�s llgatlon by the police. 44. Thal the said accused siersons hc1d oreated' false declaraUons with -the complelnant & ottier
buyors and also in Gowmrnent offices with the help or Go¼. Officials .. thus lhe completion certificates from lhe s ewral departments were
hllr,1/dnlhopolic;e.s er\llrpoople.convfimootamp/ReporMewer.aspx .- · 7/.

71
t�::��I
;
-- · · - · • ·· .. · - · · · - ,6
7/2;,/2014 VntUec! Page "C):.,,.,J}• · · ' · -.. ,. }. .. 1'0-, �

�· ·._'!'I \
obt:auned'by the accused person. nie accus ed persons ha\e thereby comm itted ihe offence Yiilh the acti\e connlvancli of Gof Official�·-. · .. •· ·,"), :�•.
made .wrong representati011s before lhe concerned departmentfs. !n 6rder to get s everal beoefits but failed to fulfill their obligatro� toy,,arc!� . ·· \
I .
'b·�
Jf: · ,_
. honaijde buyers, which has create valuable legal rights In their fa\Or and the s ame Is "valuable security_ • within the m9anlng h.ectlqf) 30 11
Hon,;e. t"es e persons ha\e also committed the offence or "Forgery of Valuable Security• punlsh.ible, U/s 467 !PC. Furthdt1 .� e ac.c:u, .
,· .
I
\ . / 06rsons ha110 created lhe abol'i) mentioned false docurnentfdecfarallons for the purpose of Inducing and to cheat the ·comple�.e !.- lh_u.s., ' · · · . . - {�
:fl f\
V/
accused r>ersons commiUed the offence of "Forgery for the purpose of cheating", punishable U/� 468 IPC. Further as they us ��l)_e·•wr,�; ( . 7 : v.' iS'
oei:laratlons as genuine. thereby they committed the offence of "using a Forged Docum ent as Genuine", punlshable Vis l!-Z-lJPAi ; �.';· ...
Further. as all lhe abow m entioned accused pe'rl!ons has conni,ed with each other In furtherance of their common lntenlfon of.thflir�[��::�.'� '..�
:
-i
·�r&..r
;.:;...--
they all induced the complainant to pay them and caus ed Iha complainant a huge wrongful loss of her \atuable i
amount. 46, 'Jjiljs, It ls cv
that they acted in connivance with each other haloing their hands tn sam e glo�. thus, they all committed thr olfence of Climlnal Consplro
beside thecheating & fraud with bonafide purchasers . 47. Toal. II Is e\idenl from the aboi.e mentioned facts and circumstances that t
accused pers ons In collusfon and connivance with each other. dellberately malafidly and dishonestly misappropriated the money end t
property of lhe complainant which were under lhe control . custody ani:I entru�tnient of the a9cused pers on and they mlsujed the samo
their own benefits and hence committed the offence or criminal breach of lrus t as defined U/s 4.0S ·IPC punishable U/& 406 IPC. 48. Furtl·
as they all were the beneficiary or the commission or the abo\<3 said offences and as they all were:ha\lng Well In their knowledge that th•
all abo'-Emenlloned acts and omiss ion are wrongful In nature, but, s till they wen! ahead in c·omrnlss lon of the· abow mentioned -offences vii
lheir aforesaid modus operandi, causing the complainant a huge wrongful loss upon ha\.lng a Crinilrial Conspiracy & Common · fntentlon, ,
contem plated Ufs . 120-B and 34 1. P.C. The accu�ed persons haw willfully and Intentionally aided leach other In their acts w(th respect
Iha offences complained abow and also by their omission and commission abetted !he offences Com p lained within the meaning of s ectic
1 07 1 P.O and hence haw com r11ltted offence U/s, 109 1.P.C. " 49. That as the accus ed p ersons tiaw commnted cog nizable plfences UI
4061<107 read with s e cllon 4 1 5/420/1 09/120-B134· !PC within the Jurisdiction of Police Station of : E. O.W and the com plainant lo dged
comp lalnt before the police station a gainst the accus ed p e1$ons which wes duly acknowledged as recelwd on 16,05,201 1 '.4dJ! D, O , Ne
4963. (Copy of the comp lalnt dated 16.05.201 1 Is annexed herewith as ANNl;Y URE•"T • 50. That being aggrie�&irom tfi'e""acts of . th
accused persons and suffering a hu ge wron g ful loss and a hug e wrongful g ain to the above mentioned accused p enions, the com plalnar
prefers this complaint before this Hon'ble court. P R.AYER It is thsrefore , most res11 ectfully p rayed befor& this Hon�ble Court that In -.!ew ,
Iha abo\e mentioned facts and circumstances or tho present matter: this Hon'ble CQ'urt ma y, be pleased : • Q) to lake ccignlianca ag alm
the accused p ersons and lo summon. try and Pl/nlsfi .th(). accused p ersons for the commission of Iha abolli;I mentioned cog nlza�le offence�
in accordance with law. (ll )To pass any other and further relleUorder whlch !his Hon'ble Court teems fit end p ro per In accordance with th
facts & circumstances of the case so as to be in the Interest or Justice as well as of the com plalnanUpetltloner. ScJ/· f;;n g llsh c;om p lainar
0 Through couns el VINEET BAHL &. ASSOCIATES Adwi,;ates DATED For PA1H FINDER' (INDIA) lAW FIRM/TM "3/115, RAMESH NAGAR
MEW OELHl- 1 1 0015 CH. No. 1 08, W. WING, 11S HAZi\Rl·COURTS (PH. 921 00,92100), To, The O y ty Officer, P.S•eOW, Meti.!y a · Nag ai
Now Delr.r II is s ubmitted thal an order dated 14/12/1 1 by lh E;i Court or Sh. Ra kesh Pandit,' Ld. ACMM, Sakel Court, Nev, -Deltil U/s 156. (;
Cr. ? .C. passed. on the complaint of Smt. Rachna Arora has been recel')ed. directing therein to lnwstlgate the mailer after lodging a FIR
i'rom rhe contents or complaint prima facle an offence {J/$ 406/407/41 5(420/467/468/471 /109/1 208/34 IPC Is found lo be made out, A ca�.
under abow said sections may be registered an\! copy or FtR a nd original Rukka, may be handed o\<3r lo me for further ln-.estlgatlon. Data d
T:me of. occurrence: December 2006 onwards . Place or Occurrence: �-1 , Am efican Plaza, International Trade Tower. Nehru Place, Ne\•
Delhi. Oato & 'lime of handing O\er Rukka: 1 6112/1 1 al 9:30 A.M. Sd/• English. 61 ARUN KUMAR, 0-4301, PIS N0.1608021 9,ALB RIEO\i',
. Dt-16/1 21 1 1 .Aclion taken al police s tation et lhls lime S I ARUN KUMAR, 0-430 1 , P.IS N0. 1 6080219,ALBRIEOW came ln the pollc�
s,atlo,, and produced the abova menlioned complaint for the registration of case. Case has been registered, Copy of FIR and orlglnel Rukka
is being h�ndlng owr to SI ARUN KUMAR, D-430 1 , PIS N0. 1 6080219,ALB R/EOW for further lnwstlgatlon. Copy of FIR will be dellwred to
c;oncemed officors lhrough OAK . W/HC/00
· i
1 3 . Action Ta ke n (Slnco the a bove lnformaUon re ve a l s com i:nlssl o n of offo n co(s) ufs as mo ntlono d at !to m no.2 :
(I) Rogisto ro d the ca s,e a nd to o k up the lnvo.stfgotlon OR
(fl) Olro cto d (Namo of tho I . OJ: Ra nk:
PIS Num bor: to take up the lnvestlgaUon ,OR
(i lJ}Rofus& t n ve stlga tlon due to: OR
(lv)Tra nsfo rre d to P . S(na m e ): Olstr.l ct:
on point of Jurlsdlclit-n.
1'. I.R. re a d ove r lo the compla inant I Informa n t, admitte d . to be corro clly recorde d a nd a copy give n to the compla inant /
informant, lre o of cost : ·
;· •:
RO.A. C : :
0 1 4.
Signa ture I Thumb Impre ssion of Th e Com plain a nt / S ign ature of
Inform a nt : Office r. ;
NAM E - ;
RANK
PIS NUMBER
1 5. Dato a nd Time of d o spa tch to the court:
1111p:1lrleltupolice.ser1erpeople.col'IVfirv.ebte�R eportViewar .asp>:
l
72 'I'
FIRST INFORMATION REPORT

I
I
(Under Section 154 Cr. P.C.)

(Internet Copy)
I. District CRIME AND RAILWAYS P.S.: EOW YEAR: 2011 FIR NO: 0245
DATE: 16/12/2011
2. Act(s): Section(s):
(1) IPC 1860 468
(2) IPC 1860 415
(3) IPC 1860 34
(4) IPC 1860 471
(5) IPC 1860 420
(6) IPC 1860 406
(7) IPC 1860 109
(8) IPC 1860 467
(9) IPC 1860 407
(10) IPC 1860 120B
3. Occurrence of Offence:
(a) Day: Friday Date From: 01/12/2006 Date to: 16/12/2011
Time Period: Time From: hrs* Time to: hrs*
(b) Information received at P.S.: Date: 16/12/2011 Time: 09:30 hrs
(c) Daily Dah-y Reference: Entry No: 2A Time: 09:30 Iu·s
4. Type of Information : WRITTEN
5. Place of Occurrence:
(a) Direction and Distance from P.S.: 0.O0KM Beat No.:
(b) Address : S-1, AMERICAN PLAZA, INTERNATIONAL TRADE
TOWER, NEHRU PLACE, NEW DELHI.
(c) In case, Outside the limit of the Police Station:
Name of P.S. : District:
6. Complainant/Informant:
(a) Name: MS. RACHNA ARORA (S/O) SH. SUMIT ARORA
(b) Date/Year of Birth: 0 Nationality: INDIAN
(c) Passport No.: Date of Issue: Place of Issue:
(d)° Occupation:
(e) Address: B2/165, PASCHIM VIHAR, NEW DELHI-110063
73
7. Details of Known/ Suspected/ Unknown accused with full particulars (attach

separate sheet if necessary).:
(1) MIS EROS RESORTS & HOTELS PVT. LTD.
(2) MR. SATISH SOOD (MANAGING DIRECTOR)
(3) MR. AMIT RAI SOOD (DIRECTOR)
(4) MR. RAMAN SOOD
(5) MR. SUMIT SOOD (DIRECTOR)
(6) MR. S.K. GUPTA (EMPLOYEE/OFFICIAL)
(7) MR. VIJAY KUMAR KAPOOR (EMPLOYEE/OFFICIAL)
(8) MR. ASHOK KUMAR SINGH (EMPLOYEE/OFFICIAL)
(9) MR. MOHIT SHARMA (EMPLOYEE/OFFICIAL)
(10) MR. A.K. KAUL (ARCHITECT/ENGINEER)
(11) MR. DIP ANKAR DUTTA (ARCHITECT)
(12) MR. GANESH RAI JUNEJA (ENGINEER)
(13) MR. AMIT SHARMA (DIRECTOR OF ROOMS)
(14) DY. DIRECTOR (BLDG) C & I
(15) DEPUTY HEALTH OFFICER
8. Reason for delay in reporting by the complainant informant:
9. Particulars of properties stolen/involved (attach separate sheet if necessary):
S.I. Property Type (Description) Est Value (Rs.) Status
10. total value of property stolen:
11. Inquest Report/ U.D. case no., if any:
12. F.I.R. Contents (attach separate sheet, if required):
IN THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,

SAKET COURTS, NEW DELHI. COMPLAINT CASE NO OF 2011 IN THE
MATTER OF: Ms. RACHNA ARORA W/o Sh. Sumit Arora, Rio BG-7/72, Paschim
Vihar, Presently residing at B-2/165, Paschim Vihar, New Delhi-110063.
COMPLAINANT VERSUS 1. Mis EROS RESORTS & HOTELS PVT. LTD.
THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR'S. 2. Mr. Satish Sood (Managing Director) Rio 19, Golf
Link, New Delhi. 3. Mr. Amit Raj Sood (Director) Rio 19. Golf Link, New Delhi. 4.
Mr. Raman Sood (Director). 5. Mr. Sumit Sood (Director). 6. Mr. S. K. Gupta
(Employee/Official). 7. Mr. Vijay Kumar Kapoor (Employee/officer). 8. Mr. Ashok
74
Kumar Singh (Employee/Officer). 9. Mr. Mohit �harma (Employee/Booking officer).

10. Mr. A.K. Kaul (Architect/Engineer) Aii"At�:···s-1, American Plaza, International
Trade Tower, Nehru Place, New Delhi-110019. 11. Mr. Dipankar Dutta (Architect) 57
Manjusha Building. 5th Floor Nehru Place, New Delhi-110019. 12. Mr. Ganesh Rai
Juneja (Engineer) Clo Juneja Tech Consultant Pvt Ltd. SA DDA Flats, Sarai Jullena,
New Delhi-110025. 13. Mr. Amit Sharma (Director of Rooms) S/o Sh. Chander
Shekhar Rio 210, Ma Vila apartments, Mayur Vihar Phase-I, New Delhi-110092. 14.
Dy. Director (Bldg) C & I Delhi Development Authority Vikas Sadan, INA New
Delhi. 15. Deputy Health Officer Shahdara South Zone, (M.C.D.) Delhi. 16.
ACP/(H&R) For Additional Commissioner of Police (Licensing), 1st Floor, P.S.
Defence Colony, New Delhi. ACCUSED/RESPONDENT. COMPLAINT UNDER
SECTIONS 420/406/407 READ WITH SECTION 415/420/467/468/471 AND
UNDER SECTION 109/120B/34 IPC ACCOMPANIED WITH APPLICATION
UNDER SECTION 156(3) Cr. P.C. MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH: 1. That
the accused No. 1 to 5 are accused company and its directors and accused No. 6 to 10
are employees under accused no. 1 to 5 and accused No. 11 & 12 are professionals
who facilitated the accused No. 1 to 5 by diving wrong undertakings and certificates
before the several departments and accused No. 13 also; have active connivance with
accused No. 1 to 10 and accused 14 To 16 are the Govt. Officials being head DDA
MCD and Licensing respectively and issued wrong/false certificate in the name of
accused No. 1 & 13 in active connivance with Accused No. 1 to 10 and failed to
perform their official duties and misuse their powers. That there may be several other
persons/ departmental officials who may be found as accused during investigation on
the present complaint. 2. That the accused No. 1 was able to get allotment of valuable
land on very cheap rates from the DDA, who had auctioned off land in the National
Capital Region(N.C.R.) on 1. i.e., pretext of Common Wealth Games 2010. Infact, the
D.D.A. had put in place a scheme for auction/tender of 33 hotel sites at concessional
rates with additional benefits despite the fact that there was no need for the same. It is
also worth mention here that the accused company was bound to develop the said land
prior to Common Wealth Games 2010, but miserably failed to do so intentionally and
in order to avail the several benefits from the various Govt. Departments falsely
showed Its project/hotel to be operational before the Common Wealth Games 2010
with several valid certificates and all this could have happened only with the active
connivance of Govt. Officials. It is further submitted that everything was operational
75
only on papers and actual story was/is quite different. 3. That in the month of
December 2006 the accused company through its directors and other officials
approached the public with their advertisements in national news papers and on
Internet issued brochures along with other printed material in order to collect a huge
amount from public by showing a very rosy picture and with false commitments and
assurances and in this way motivated the present complainant and her husband
besides many other bonafide purchasers and were able to collect over a million
thousand rupees by assuring the following things. a. That their project is based on one
Dubai based similar hotel cum shopping arcade project and sold the same by
describing its project as "THE FINE ART OF 5 STAR SHOPPING WITH EROS
BOULEVARD HOTEL CROWNE PLAZA, MAYUR VIHAR NEW DELHI,
whereby, it was specifically mentioned that in the lush exclusive environs of Eros
Boulevard, shoppers will experience an ambience like never before and no place
else. 11 b. That 11A truly premium 5 star experience with a bouquet of select brands that
will be available to the discerning shopper. An experience that will rewrite the lutes of
retailing in India. 11 c. That "over 1,00,000/- square feet of premium shopping, located
within a 5 star deluxe hotel with 350 rooms & suites, exclusive service apartments,
hrs all day dining, multi cuisine specialty restaurants, roof top bar, banquets, business
center, spa, health club. beauty parlour and a barber shop. 11 d. That "it will be a tribute
to the finer things of life. And a testimony to the future of retail. 11 e. That "Eros
Boulevard will be the perfect staging ground for a 5 star retail revolution. Spread over
1,00,000 sq. ft. across two levels the retail environment is sculpted with an
unwavering eye for detail, Water bodies Landscaping, design aesthetics. 11 f. That "the
finest in amenities making it the perfect setting for a world class experience where
every visit and every occasion is a memorable one for both shoppers and retailers. 11 g.
That 11 Eros Boulevard its not only about footfall but also its about the quality of
footfall. h. That "A premium shopping destination set in a super premium 5-star
luxury enviromnent. Differentiated experiences that'll redefine the way, the well
heeled shop, entertain, and indulge. Think about it and go for it." i. That 11Enjoy the
assurance of a formidable ally of Hotel Shangri-La New Delhi, Hotel Intercontinental
Eros Nehru Place, New Delhi, Eros Corporate Tower, New Delhi" j. That 11Eros group
has scripted some of most innovative chapter in real estate development hospitality
and town planning for over 60 years. A corporate house, it has deep interest in Real
Estate Development, having developed townships and housing projects in and around
76
Delhi. The Group's Landmark projects in the residential sector include Lakewood
City, Rosewood City Eros Gt�tid Mansions and'Efos Escalade. Its sterling presence in
the hospitality industry is marked with the 5-Star Hotel Intercontinental Eros in
Nehru Place and Hotel Shangri-La at Connaught Place. Its corporate developments
are marked by international trade Tower and the landmark Eros Corporate Towers." k.
That "With each successful foray, Eros Group has been translating many a dreams
into reality. Today Eros Group is a force to reckon with, having a proven track record
of maintaining high standards of quality, safety and futuristic planning." I. That "a
well established Hotel i.e. Inter Continental and Combined Shopping area of more
than 1 Lac Sq ft ... with world class ambience and state of Art one brand of hotel, state
of class and copy of Dubai based Five Star hotel named All the above mentioned
attractive assurances were intentionally mentioned by the accused persons to for the
purpose of extracting huge amount from the public by making a fool of the bonafide
purchasers despite the fact that the accused persons were very much aware about the
fact that they were not going to construct according to the proposed plans. Photocopy
of the brochure containing the abovementioned assurances is annexed along with the
present complaint as ANNEXURE-A (COLLY). 4. That the accused persons
approached with their proposed plan to develop a Complex" comprising of a Hotel
together with a Shopping Complex in the name and style of "Eros Boulevard"
consisting of Showrooms/shops/ ATMs/ Kiosks of various sizes and dimensions. 5.
That in the month of December 2006, the above named directors and representatives
of the Accused Company had informed the complainant that the Accused Company
intended to undertake the development & construction of Plot No. 13 A & 13 B in
Mayur Vihar, District Centre, Delhi, through their printed brochures and
advertisements. This fact later on came in the knowledge of the complainant through
agreement that the land for the said project was allotted to the Accused Company by.
Delhi Development Authority vide allotment letter no. F84 (12)/2006/CL/2156 dated
30.06.2006, and this fact was never revealed to the complainant or to any other buyer
by the accused No. 1 to 9 initially. However, the same revealed from the contents of
the agreement. 6. That it was also represented to the complainant and to the other
buyers/purchaser/investors by the said representative of the Accused Company that
the Physical possession of the said plot was taken by the Accused Company on
06.12.2006. That it was further represented to the complainant that vide Conveyance
Deed date 12.12.2006, the free hold ownership of the said plot has been duly granted,
77
conveyed, sold, released, transferred and assigned unto in the name and favour of the
Accused company. 7. That the Accused Company through its directors and
representative represented to the complainant that the Accused Company in order to
develop the said plot, the Accused Company, being a renowned real estate promote
and developer having vast expelience, is developing the said plot into a complex
comprising of a Hotel together with a Shopping Complex the name and style of Eros
Boulevard (herein after called as project) consisting of Showrooms/Shops/ATMs
· /Kiosks of vaiious size and dimensions. 8. That believing the representations, made
by the accused company, its directors and authorized representative of the Accused
Company, to be true and authentic the complainant had paid an amount of Rs
14,37,850/- (Rupees Fourteen Lacs Thirty Seven Thousand Eight Hundred and Fifty
Only) to the accused company on the false representations of the officials of the
accused company. It was only after lapse of more than four months that the accused
company entered into a Shop Buyers Agreement [ 11 hereinafter called the Agreement]
with the complainant on 12th day of April, 2007 for the purchase of the Shop Bearing
No. A-125, on ground floor, measuring approximately Super Area of 595 Sq. Ft., in
the said project of the Accused Company on the payment Plan as specified in
Schedule A attached with the Agreement. That it is pertinent to mention here that the
terms and conditions of the said agreement were completely one sided and totally
mend by the Accused Company in the shape of booklet. Copy of the said Agreement
& Schedule A dated 12th April 2007 is annexed herein as ANNEXURE- 11 B 1 '. 9. That
because the complainant wanted to avail the facilities of loan for purchasing and
investing in the said project of the Accused Company and for the said purpose of loan
the Accused Company, its directors and representatives assure the complainant to
provide proper assistance along with the approved sanction plans of the said project
which shall be provided by the Accused Company for facilitating the loan disbursal to
the complainant. That it is pertinent to mention here that till date the Accuse
Company, its directors and representatives have squarely failed to supply the requisite
documents containing the approval plans etc in respect of the said project as
committed by the Accused Company to the complainant despite the fact that the
complainant requested the accused persons for the same but due to which the
complainant could not avail the loan facility from the bank leading to hardship and
misery to the complainant on this account. I 0. That in the said agreement, the
Accused Company had integrated a clause i.e., Clause 2(g) of the said agreement, in
78
respect of Preferential Location Charges, which was specifically omitted in the said
...,
. agreement by mentioning 'N/A (Not Applicable) in respect of the shop/space
purchased by/reserved for the complainant. 11. That it is pertinent to mention here
that in the light of abovementioned facts, no Preferential Location Charges were
applicable to the complainant which was otherwise to be paid in addition to the Basic
Sale Price for which the complainant agreed to enter into the said agreement as per
Schedule of the Agreement, but the accused persons are very much professional and
used to cheating the bonafide buyers in the guise of charging Illegal Preferentiai
Location Charges. 12. That since beginning after making the first payment to the
accused company on the false Insurances of the Accused No. 2 to 9, the complainant
approached the Accused Company and to the other accused persons, a number of
times with the request to provide the plans approved by the concerned authorities,
upon which the complainant could avail the loan facility by the banks for the purpose
of getting finance facility to purchase her dream shop in the said project of the
Accused Company. 13. That the Complainant had given the payments of instalments
from time to time as and when called by the Accused Company, its directors and other
officials, as per the terms and conditions of the said agreement. 14. That it is further
submitted that the Accused Company had issued the receipts and acknowledgment
against the said payments by the complainant. It is pertinent to mention here that the
accused persons had received a amount of Rs 14,37,650/- (Rupees Fourteen Lacs
Thirty Seven Thousand Eight Hundred and Fifty Only) from the complainant prior to
execute the abovementioned agreement (ANNEXURE-B), by specifically mentioning
the Shop No. A-125, therefore, thereafter the said agreement was executed in respect
of said shop, which was arbitrarily changed and intimated to the complainant in the
year 2009 as mentioned in the following paras. 15. That it is pertinent to mention here
that vide letter 20th July, 2007, the Accused Company has specifically demanded the
payment relating to raft construction from the complainant, on one hand which means
that the plans have been approved to the Accused Company, by the concerned
authorities but on the other hand the Accused Company kept the complainant in dark
in relation to the approved plans so that loan could be facilitated at the behest of the
complainant from the bank/ financial institution Copy of the letter dated 20th July
2007 is annexed herein along with the complainant for the kind perusal of this
Hon'ble Court as ANNEXURE-C 16. That pursuant to the execution of the
Agreement the Accused Company failed to provide the approved sanction plan and
79
due to non availability of the approved sanction plans of the project the complainant
could not get/ avail the loan/ finance facility from the bank or other financial
institutions it is also worth mention here that the complainant vide letter dated 3rd
November, 2008 requested the Accused Company to it for booking of commercial
space in the said project. Copy of the letter dated 03.11.2008 is annexed herein along
with the complainant for the kind perusal of this Hon1ble Court as ANNEXURE-D.
17. That there was a complete silence on the part of the Accused Company or other
accused persons to respond to the complainant1 s above request letter dated
03.11.2008, but the Accused Company after a period of four months informed the
complainant through correspondence dated 30.03.2009, that the construction of the
above said project is in full swing and the same is likely to be completed and it further
informed that the construction of 3rd Floor of the said project is in progress and the
Accused Company further informed the complainant that the area reserved for the
complainant at A-125 or Ground Floor was allotted to the complainant on provisional
basis and subject to change at the time of necessary approvals or during the course of
construction it MIS further conveyed to the complainant that now the building plans
have been approved by DDA, and all local authorities therefore the new number
reserved for the complainant was B-167 on upper Lobby Level measuring
approximately 260 Sq. Ft. of Super Area on the Plot No 13 A instead of space no. A-
125 measuring approx. 595 Sq. Ft. of Super Area on Plot no. 13B. Copy of the letter
dated 30.03.2009 is annexed herein along with the complainant for the kind perusal of
this Hon1ble Court as ANNEXURE-E. 18. That it was for the first time when the
accused company has infonned the complainant about the sanction approval of
construction plans by the concerned authority. It is stated that the Accused Company
kept the complainant in dark or misrepresented the complainant till the receipt of
letter dated 30th March 2009 by the complainant. 19. That upon receipt of the said
notice dated 30th March 2009 the complainant Approached the Accused Company
and to the above named accused persons, who are/were director/s and officials of the
accuse company for clarification of te1ms in respect of the said notice then the
Accused Company, its directors, representatives and officials insisted the complainant
to accept the terms unconditionally, mentioned in the said letter of the Accused
Company. It is fu1iher pertinent to mention here that without any option in hand, the
complainant had to accept the said terms of the Accused Company as the complainant
had invested her and her family's life time saving of their hard earned money. 20. That
80
thereafter as desired and directed by the Accuser Company. Its directors

representatives and officials:· thb 'c'omplainarif li�a to send a letter dated 07th April
2009 to the Accused Company mentioning about the meeting held with company
officials and the details about the changed payment plan which however was again
never acknowledged by the accused company. Copy of the letter dated 07.04.2009 is
annexed herein along with the complainant for the kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court
as ANNEXURE-F. 21. That on number of personal meetings and verbal requests, in
continuance of the Communication dated 30th March 2009, the complainant further
sent a letter dated 14th April 2009 to the Accused Company and -requested the
Accused Company to change the location from B-167 on the Upper Level floor of
Hotel Holiday Inn, Mayur Vihar, New Delhi, as per the current allotment, by the
Accused Company to the other location on ground floor of Intercontinental Hotel,
Mayur Vihar., because the complainant had initially booked the Shop no. A-125 at the
Plot No. 13-B i.e. Intercontinental at Ground Floor, in the said project. Copy the letter
dated 14.04.2009 is annexed herein along with the complaint for the kind perusal of
this Hon'ble Court as ANNEXURE G. 22. That However on personal meetings and
discussions and during the meeting with the officials of the Accused Company, the
complainant was offered and proposed by the Accused persons to take the allotment
of shop no. A- 61 Instead of allotment of B-167, without any further condition of the
Accused Company. 23. That in continuance of the personal meetings add discussion
the complainant vide its latter date 11th May 2009, stated that Shop No, A-61 was
verbally offered by the Accused company on Lobby Floor on 8th May, 2009 Instead
of the allotment of B-167 on upper lobby are the complainant confinned and agreed
for shop no. A-61, as per the new schedule of payment mentioned in the same letter,
24. That as per the conduct of the Accused persons, the complainant had put the
verbal assurances of the Accused persons in a written manner by putting the
deliberations of the meeting in the said letter dated 11th May 2009. It is further stated
that the relevant extract of the said letter dated 11th of May 2009 is extracted herein
below:- We hereby agree for the shop A-61 and would like to make the payments in
the below mentioned schedule. This is our humble request that the company should
provide us with the following and approves our payment schedules. a. The shop
allotted to i.e., A-61 on the lobby is the final allotment with the approve plans and
maps clearly mentioning the shop location in the company's final approved plans. In
any circumstances, company will not change the location of the shop. b. Conveyance
81
deed is to be executed immediately with offer of possession in our favour. c. Payment

Schedule: i. Rs IO lakhs 25/05/2009. ii. Rs 05 lakhs- 25.09.2009 . .iii. Rs 05 lakhs
25.12.2009. iv. Rs. 05 lakhs 25.02.2010 v. Rs 05 lakhs 25.04.2010. Balance on offer
of possession. d. We are enclosing a cheque no. 158179 of Rs 10,00,000/- (Rupees
Ten Lacs Only) to be presented only when above conditions are approved by the
company and settled in writing and given to us before 15th May 2009. Copy of the
letter date 11.05.2009 is annexed herein along with the complaint for the kind perusal
of this Hon'ble Court as ANNEXURE-H. 25. That through its letter dated 11th May
2009 the complainant requested the accused persons to confirm that the Shop Allotted
to her i.e., A-61 on Lobby Floor was final allotment with approved plans and maps
clearly mentioning the shop location in accused company's final approval plans and
with confirmation that the Accused Company shall not change the location of the
shop. It was further requested to the Accused persons to confirm that Conveyance
Deed shall be executed immediately with an offer of possession in favor of the
complainant. The detailed payment schedule was also mentioned in the said letter and
a Cheque was also enclosed bearing no.158179 for an amount of Rs. I 0.00 Lacs
favour of the Accused Company with the conditions mentioned in the said letter.
Because, it was the condition, upon the accused person that the accused company will
present the said cheque only when all the conditions mentioned in the said letter are
approved in writing b con the Accused Company. It is pertinent to mention here that
the conditions of the complainant were automatically approved by the accused
persons at the very moment when the Accused Company presented the said cheque
for encashment in terms of the said letter. 26. The vide letter dated i.e., May 2009, the
Accused Company informed the complainant that the Accused Company has
provisionally reserve Space No A-61 on lobby level measuring 395 Sq. Ft. of Super
Area on the plot no. 13 B at an aggregate value (Basic Sale Price) of Rs. 105,15,875/
(Rupees one crore five lacs sixteen thousand eight hundred and seventy five only)
instead of space no. B-167. It is pertinent to mention here that here that in the said
letter the Accused Company had specifically mentioned that the complainant is bound
to comply with all the terms and conditions of the Agreement dated 12th April, 2007
executed between the complainant & Accused Company. As mentioned above that
neither in the said Agreement there was any mention of the Preferential Location
Charges to be applicable in case of the complainant nor in the letter dated 18th May
2009. But, the same shows the height & magnitude of the fraudulent transactions
82
carried out by the accused persons to cheat anyone. Copy of the letter dated
18.05.2009 is annexed herei;·;l�ng with the c�iriplaint for the perusal of this Hon'ble
Court as ANNEXURE-I. 27. That the complainant states that vide letter dated 18th
May, 2009, the Accused Company mentioned only the Basic Sale Price by quoting an
amount of Rs 1,05,16,875/- (Rupees One Crore Five Lacs Sixteen Thousand eight
Hundred and Seventy Five Only) for the space no. B-61 on the lower lobby in the said
project. It is further pertinent to mention here that the Accused Company nowhere
mentioned that for the allotment of A-61 any Preferential Location Charges would be
liable to be borne by the complainant. 28. That the Accused Company, its directors,
officials or anyone else in this world cannot change the Basic Sale Price of The Shop
in question by extraneously demanding any Preferential Location Charges added in
addition to any increased price in relation to Basic Sale Price it is not only illegal by
against & contrary to the terms & conditions of the Agreement dated 12.04.2007
between the complainant and the Accused Company it is stated that the said conduct
is ex-fade and against the principles of natural justice and the Accused persons cannot
claim more than the amount originally agreed between the parties. 29. That as per the
said letter dated 18th May 2009 the Accused Company cleverly, arbitrarily and
fraudulently increased the Basic Sale Price without any rhyme or reason, in the case
of the complainant. The said conduct is an illegal, arbitrary and void ab-initio conduct
on the part of the Accused persons. 30. That in view of the above cited facts and
circumstances the complainant had no option in hand and had to write a letter dated
081-h June 2009 to the Accused Company and in the said letter the complainant
confirmed and informed the Accused persons that the Shop no. A-61 on the Lobby
Level measming 395 Sq Ft on Plot No.13-B is finally allotted to the complainant by
the Accused Company. It was further informed to the accused persons that the
Accused Company had encashed the said cheque for an amount of Rs. 10,00,000/
(Rupees Ten Lacs Only) enclosed by the complainant with the letter dated 11th May
2009, without any objections and impliedly accepted the tenns of the letter dated 11th
May, 2009 which tantamount to acceptance of the terms of the payment schedule
given by the complainant to the accused company along with other conditions of the
same letter. Copy of the letter dated 08.06.2009 is annexed herein along with the
complaint for the kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court as ANNEXURE-3. 31. That vide
letter dated 8h June 2009, the complainant also informed the accused persons that
there has been some error in calculation at the end of accused company respect of the
83
aggregate price of the space in the said project of the Accused Company. The
complainant further informed the accused persons that the terms & conditions of the
original Shop Buyer's Agreement never changed while offering the new Shop Space
co the complainant, as confirmed by the Accused Company in its letter dated 18th
May 2009 and therefore, the original rate of the space in the said project as per the
terms of The Shop Buyers Agreement is Rs.24, 125/- (Rupees Twenty-Four Thousand
One Hundred and Twenty Five Only) per sq. ft., It is further stated that the shop No
A-61 on Lobby Level is the area· of 395 sq. ft. and as per the calculation of the said
space, rate fixed under the agreement become Rs 95,29,375/- (Rupees Ninty Five
Lacs Twenty Nine Thousands Three Hundred and Seventy Five Only). 32. That as per
the letter dated 18th May 2009, the Accused Company intentionally with mala:fide
intentions calculated Rs. 1,05,16,865/- (Rupees One Crore Five Lacs Sixteen
Thousand Eight Hundred and Severity Five Only) instead of Rs.95,29,375/-Rupees
Ninety-Five lacs twenty nine Thousands three hundred and seventy five only) for
aggregate basic sale price. for an area of 395 sq. ft of shop no. Aw61 allotted to the
complainant 33. That-in reply to the notice dated 08 June 2009 of the complainant, the
accused persons issued a letter dated 7th Jul 2009 to the complainant wherein the
accused persons have alleged all the facts contrary to what has actually transpired in
reality and was infonned to the accused persons by the complainant vide her letter
dated 08th June 2009. In their letter dated 7th July, 2009 to the complainant the
accused persons wrongly contended that the complainant had agreed to pay the
Preference Location Charges demanded by the Accused Company. It is pertinent to
mention here that only with the intention to exploit the complainant the accused
persons further alleged that the complainant had agreed to pay Rs 1,05,16,875/
(Rupees One Crore Five Lacs Sixteen Thousand Eight Hundred and Seventy Five
Only) to the Accused Company and the same includes the Preference Location
Charges in addition to the Basic Sale Price. It is further submitted and pertinent to
mention here that from the date of entering into the agreement, the term of Basic Sale
price and the Preference Location Charges, under the agreement were specifically and
separately defined in unequivocal terms. It is reiterated that the clause of said
Preference Location Charges was never applicable upon the complainant. It is further
submitted that till the letter dated 7 July the accused persons never whispered the
111
imposition of the said preference location charges in the case complainant. Copy of
the letter dated 07.07.2009 is rumexed herein along with the complaint for the kind
84
.
the letter
. . 3 4 Th a t at the end of
A.NNEXURE K
M ·
Court. an · xnress
on 'bl e mplainant, m e
t'
e ru sal of thi s H . . .. ,- . � - d th e co
P . y thr ea te n e
, the Accu..se .. d Comp an ed
dated 07.07.2009 Fi ve T h o us and Six Hundr
N"mty
, 68 8/ (Rupe
es Eleven Lacs ndred
words, pay Rs 11 , 9 5
ened the Six hu
M
furt h er thr eat

ately and
d Ei gh ty- Ei. ght OnlY) immedi ym ent of Rs 11,95
,68 81 -
an o f no n -p a
. case
. tness , 111
to fac e the unpl easan ght Only) to
co mp l ain ant
. ds Si
.
x H un d re d and Eighty Ei
ousan
cs Nmty F'ive Th ember
(Rupees Eleven La an t v1 . d e 1 etter dated 19th Nov
the compl .
am
any. 35 . That d
the Accused Comp tic
.
e to tlle Ac cused Company an
m no
a d eta1·1 ed letter cu
2009 ' further sent . cu se d Comp any. It is su
bmitted the
d e by the Ac
the allegations ma
specifically denied a mp any' the complainant
called
Ac cu se d C
cum noti ce to the
through the said letter . and further
wi th dra w the ir lett er. d ated 07 July 2009
any to .
up on the Accused Comp on of Bas
.
ic Sale Pnce
. the w ron g cal cu lati
persons to rectify
requested to the accused hand over the
. ·
th & 19 th M ay 20 09 and further requested to
v1de their . l etter d ate 18
g
cti on ed plan s wi th the specification �f the �hop Beann
copy of the approved & san
v1de letter cum
ed to the com plain ant and mt . hi sway the complamant
N 0• A-61 ' all ott
ions to the
19. 11. 200 9, reit erat ed all the contentiens and communicat
notice dated
ein along
- notice 19.11.2009 is annexed her
accused persons. Copy of the letter cum
'ble Court as ANNEXURE-L. 36.
with the compliant of the kind perusal if this Hon
then sent a reply, dated 25th
That the accused persons through accused company
November 2009 of the
February 2010, to the said Letter- Cum-Notice dated 19th
the submission and
complainant, wherein the accuse persons very cleverly denied
ct and without
contentions of the complainant to avoid their liability under the contra
doing equity start seeking equity by demanding balance amount illegally without
completing the project within the stipulated period and fu1iher tried to cheat by
charging alleged Preference Location Charges from the complainant in an illegal and
arbitrary manner. 37. That till (date the complainant had made a payment of Rs
45,88,594/- (Rupees forty Five Lakhs Eighty Eight TI1ousand Five hundred and
Ninety Four only) due to false representations and wrong commitments of the accused
persons in lieu of the said Basic. Price of shop number A-61 the said project of the
Accused Company through the accused persons. It is further pertinent to mention here
that the accused persons without considering its own conduct made its opinion over
the status the complainant by putting the words that "it appears to the Accused
Company that the complainant do not have the sufficient money to fulfil its
contractual liabilities and to pay to the Accused Company,,. It is submitted in this
85
reg
� that it is basic principal
of Jaw tl1at the
rd
equity, tl1erefore, person who seeks

the Accused compa . equity must do
ny failed to pern
harshly attacked o nn its own respon
the self-respect sibilities and
. and r.eputati.on .
said reply dated of e complamant. 38.
25th February 2 010 That in the
th
. . , th e accused person
subm1ss1on of th s d erue . d the contentio
e compl ama . nt and furthe ns and
r demanded the
Location Charges sa1 d alleged prefere
from the c omp 1 am nce
. . an t •
m an ille gal and arbitrary m
submitted the acc .
anner. It is further
used persons hav
e stooped down
amount 11aving been to t111s
• conduct due to
already paid b the a huge
complama . nt to the accused
the said agreement company under
and secondl Y tly 1e Accused Company
forfeit on I·ts own tenns
1iave reserved its rights
to
tl1e h ard earned money
mvested by the compl
project of the accused ainant in the
company. Photocopy of
. the reply letter dated 25
annexed herem .02.2010 is
along with the complaint
for the kind perusal of thi
s Hon'bIe Court as
ANNEXURE-M. 3 9. That .
at the end of the reply dated 25
· 02 · 2010, th e A ccused
Company further again thr
eatened the complainant to
eitl1er pay an alleged amount �f
Rs 32, 99 , 062/- (Rupees Thirty Two Lac
s Ninety Nine thousand and Six
ty Two Onl y)
or m case of non-payment of the
said alleged amount to tenninate the
.
said
allotment/reservation of shop no. A-6 I at plot
No. 13B of the said project and also to
forfeit the amount to the extent of 15% of the total
sale price along with holding
charges and interest on unpaid instalments by the complainan
t (which wiII siphon off
a portion mere than alleged 15% from the paid amount of the compl
ainant) from the
amount paid till date by the complainant. 40. That the accused company firstly
cheated the complainant by showing rosy pictures and secondly cheated by selling a
non-existent shop to the complainant on price as per printed format of the company's
leafi:et and was assured to be at par price with respect to other customers, thirdly
cheated the complainant on the tenns of rates as there was a huge difference in prices.
Photocopy of the printed format of the price is annexed herein along with the
complaint for the kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court as ANNEXURE-N. 41. That
there is cheating and fraud on the part of the accused person, when they issued the
first demand letter to the complainant containing assurances by the accused persons
about construction to be started once plans were approved and the project was to be
delivered in 30 months i.e. on or before January 2010. Since the beginning of the
project and till today no details were provided to the complainant or to the other
buyers of the project by the accused No. 1 to 9 and also failed to provided the
approved plans in spite of complainant's repeated communications, which was/is
86
tion, 42. That the accused persons

mandatory to avail loan from any financial institu
committed fraud & cheating
have malafide intentions since beginning and repeatedly
could be judged from the
with the complainant and other buyers and the same
d collecting money in
following sub-paras: a. That the accused persons firstly starte
possession and
the name of their project from the market without having any
complainant and other
approved plants and concealed these material facts from the
located within a
buyers and shown over 1,00,000 Square Feet of premium shopping
°
accused company
single Two-building 5-star deluxe hotel with 350 rooms. b. That the
Plaza but
had in the first instance shown their tie-up and agreement with Hotel Crown
later on changed with Hotel Holiday Inn, Hotel Intercontinental and then also availed
the certificates in the name of Hotel Intercontinental but till date none of the above
mentioned hotel is ever operational in the project of the accused company and
recently in the month of August-September 2011 one hotel Double Tree started at the
same place. This fact is itself sufficient to show the cheating & fraud on the part of
accused persons due to falsely committing construction of Hotel Intercontinental in
their project and further cheating & fraud on the part of accused persons is also
judged from the fact that the accused company failed to issue any letter to its buyers
including the complainant for giving possession or ready fur possession prior to
Common Wealth Games 2010 which was the main essence of paying -such a huge
price (more than 400% over the market price for equivalent space at that time) nor the
small space offered by the accused company. The complainant lost upon a huge
business opportunity by not being able to open her shop during the period of common
Wealth Games 2010 and therefore suffered a big loss of money due to false
assurances of the accused company of completing the project before the inaguration
of Games 2010. c. That the agreement in question was executed after 4 months from
the date of first receipt of payment and accused persons who were already aware of
their malafide intentions therefore in a ve1y clever manner mentioned in the said
agreement that the brochures and printed advertising material will not
be part of
agreement, which itself is/was an offence on part of the accused
persons. Because,
even prior to execution of agreement dated 12.04.2007, accused
persons had collected
an of Rs. 14, 37 .850/- (Rupees Fourteen Lacs Thirty Seven thou
sand Eight Hundred
and Fifty Only.) from the complainant on the basis of promo
tional brochures ano
printed mateiials but, intentionally mentioned at page No. 19
in para No. 46 of the
agreement, which is under- 46 "it is expressly agreed betwe
en the parties that any
87
advertisements, brochures,. hand bills issued by the Company does not fonn the basis
of this Agreement with the Company. The Company is only bound by the tetn1s and
conditions as incorporated in writing in to this Agreement and signed by the Directors
of the Company or any official authorized by the Board of Directors of the company.
In this way the accused persons tried to cheat its innocent buyers by fonnulating and
imposing such unfair conditions in its agreements with buyers of their project who
were already bound to the accused company having paid a huge amount of money
only on the public face and reputation ·of accused company without having any iota of
a doubt of fraudulent intentions of cheating by the accused company. d. That besides
abovementioned condition the accused persons also imposed several other one sided
conditions to suitably modify unfair conditions imposed on its buyers, which is
clearly the abuse of dominant position of the accused company in this case after
receiving/collecting huge amount and also in respect of the basic rights of the buyers.
The earlier deliberation on the elements and extent of abuse make it clear that accused
persons have been grossly abusing their dominant positions and that too against a
vulnerable section of consumers, who have little ability to act or organize against such
abuse. The strict action against the accused persons must be taken and exemplary cost
must he imposed on the accused persons for their blatant abuse of dominance. e. That
the abusive practices referred to above have been carried with the object of undue
economic gains and business profits. On other hand, the consistent practice of
executing unfair conditions a holding out false representations and exploiting the
dominant position can be seen from the conduct of the accused persons as detail
above in this complaint which are certainly aggravating factors. The conduct of the
accused persons in abusing its dominant Position requires to be taken very seriously
and thus, this Hon'ble Court is required to adopt a deterrent approach so that
recurrence of such conduct is stopped. That the accused person changed the actual
Drawings & Plans, which were shown to the buyers and presently on s everything is
different and the construction is completely different on site. g. That the accused
persons assured to the purchaser/investor/buyers that they are committed to deliver
well before common wealth games but they failed to complete their project prior to
the Common Wealth Caries and therefore, they arbitrarily bound the buyers after
receiving huge amount/s much prior- from the execution of their one sided agreement
on the pretext that the tenns & conditions mentioned in their agreement are
completely favoring to the accused company because, they want to deliver the
88
possession to the buyer/in:vestors within the stipulated period and due to this
agreement, no body may create hurdle in tl1eir project and in fact, the agreement in
question was made one sided on order to avoid any litigation or harassment by any
notorious investor/buyer. It is also pertinent to mention here that the complainant
raised some objections on the few points favouring to the accused company before the
representative of the accused company, who refused to amend the terms conditions
mentioned in the agreement on the pretext that they cannot changed the agreement
person to pers·on and if they will start amending it person to person, 1n that case they
can never complete the project and there will be no uniformity among the buyers of
the project and therefore, the complainant had no choice except to the sign the
agreement given to her, which was printed in a shape of books and in a cyclostyle
manner by the accused persons on behalf of accused company and by that time the
complainant had already paid huge payment of more than 14 lacs to the accused
I
person No. 1 to 9. h. That the accused person further cheated their buyers/investors c
the terms of Preferential Location Charges (P .L. C) and even arbitrary changing the
location, size and number of their shops/area and the extracting more amount for
smaller space other than the larger space firstly agreed upon at the time of execution
of the agreement. 1. that accused persons made the wrong commitments to attract the
bonafide purchesers/buyers/investors and then failed to fulfil the obligation towards
their bonafide buyers and also failed to complete the project within the assured
stipulated period of 30 months from the July 2007, when the accused persons
demanded the amount from the buyers on the pretext of "Raft Foundation. J. That the
accused persons changed the total land and subdivided the commercial area of single
project and changed the same in two different projects by way of subdivision
arbitrarily and unilaterally. K. That the complainant now realizing that the accused
company was not entitle, empowered or authorized to construct the single project on
the Plot No. 13 A & B as alleged in their Brochures and meetings and all this rosy
picture were designed in order to extract money from the market/public and to sell
their project on a higher rate. I. Tiiat the accused persons fails to disclose earlier that
the accused company was not entitle, empowered or authorized to construct the single
project en the Plot No. 13 A & B as alleged in their Brochures and meetings in the
stai1ing to their bonefide purchasers, because due to this malafide conduct of the
accused persons, investor/buyer/purchaser suffered very badly after investing in the
project of accused persons. m. That there was no such brand outlets or branded 5-star
89
hotels were associated in the project and the accused persons intentionally with the
malafide intention mentioned the name of brands with their projects at the initial stage
to attract the investors and therefore, presently no such alleged name of brands exists
there which again constitutes fraud executed by the accused company on its gullible
investor/buyer/purchaser. n. That there it very much discrepancy in the prices/fates as
per print format of the company's leaflet and sold at the higher rate to the complainant
in comparisons of other buyers, to whom the accused persons sold the area situated in
the same location at the much lesser rates in comparison of the present complainant
and the present complainant was hot aware about such type of practices by a builder,
because the complainant had then recently shifted from India to Sri Lanka and the
complainant and her husband were out of India at that point of time and the accused
persons cheated the complainant on the terms of rates as there is very much
discrepancy in the rates for the same space for other buyers. o. That the accused
persons intentionally not completed their project within the stipulated period i.e., 30
months from their first demand in the month of July 2007, which must have started
only after approval of site plan, but the accused persons in the year 2009 mentioned in
their correspondences that their site plans have now been approved and thereafter
changed the location, area and number of the area/shop allotted to the buyers. p. That
the accused persons intentionally not provided the approved site plan till today to the
complainant and other buyers despite the fact that the complainant repeatedly
demanded the same since beginning. Photocopies of several mails in this regard are
annexed alongwith present complaint for the kind perusal of th.is Hon 1ble Court as
ANNEXURE-O (Colly) q. That the accused persons have no explanations in respect
of e-mails sent to the accused persons and the explanations for changes in drawings
and plans and tl1e present form of construction, is completely different from the
original assured plans and also failed to explain that how they allotted the numbers
after showing the site plan without having any approval of the same. Photocopies of
the initial site plan in this regard are annexed alongwith present complaint for the kind
-perusal of this Hon'ble Court as ANNEXURE- P. r. That the accused person wrongly
committed at the time of booking that they are committed to .deliver the possession to
the complainant before the Common Wealth Games· and failed to do so. But,
fraudulently availed the completion certificate from all the relevant departments on
papers prior to the Common Wealth Games and this vary fact crone in the knowledge
of the complainant after receiving the certified copies from the D.D.A. under the
90
Right to. Infonnation Act. Photocopies of the documents availed under R.T.I. in this
regard are annexed alongwit:h present compiaintfor the kind perusal of this Hon'ble
· Count as ANNEXURE -Q (Colly). s. That the complainant able to know about the
cheating & Frauds committed by accused persons from the documents availed from
the D.D.A. under the R.T.I. Act, its further transpired that accused persons with active
connivance of each other were able to get the Operational Licenses from the accused
No. 14 to 16 for the purpose of operating Hotel Intercontinental and Dining
Restaurant (ALL DAY DINING INFINITY), Lodging Facility, Lounge Bar,
Restaurant Oriental Chutney, Swimming Pool. Fitness Center (SPA
INTERCONTINENTAL). License for operating lift for MIS HOTEL
INTERCONTINENTAL, Fire Inspection Report/N.O.C. from Head-Quarters Delhi
Fire Service, New Delhi-110001, Completion Certificate from Delhi Urban Arts
Commission. t. That there is clear cut extortion in the hidden way on the pretext of
demanding an amount of Rs. 10,00,000/- approximately as Preferential Location
Charges (P.L.C.) from the complainant, despite the fact that the accused persons
are/were not entitle for demanding the same. u. That the accused persons must have
availed huge monetary benefits from several departments and huge subsidies on
banker investment's interest due to showing the fake completion of project with the
active connivance of several Govt. officials, which may include an amount several
hundred lacs rupees cheating of revenue with the Govt. & Banks besides the wrongs
commitments with the complainant and other buyers. v. That as per recent lmowledge
of the complainant it further came in the lmowledge that the accused person's modes
operandi is same to cheat the other buyers/investors of other projects pending or
continuing alongwith the project in which present complainant paid her valuable
amount to the accused persons. w. That the accused persons also adopted the same
policy in their Dwaka1s Sector 14 project and bifurcated total area in two parts and
also cheated the persons, who invested in the said another project of the accused
persons and used to shift the investors/buyers from its one project to another by
saying that their new project is much more valuable in comparisons of project in
which they had ,invested. Photocopies of relevant documents of another project are
annexed alongwith present complaint for the kind perusal of this Hon'ble Comi as
ANNEXURE-R (Colly). x. That the accused persons are habitual offender and
therefore, they not only cheated the complainant or other investors/buyer but also able
to get the completion certificate-before the Common Wealth Games arid cheated the
91
Government as well despite the fact that the construction work at site was never
completed at that point of time and no correspondence made it respect of giving
possession to the complainants, which clearly shows that the accused persons failed to
complete their project till 02.10.2010. Video recording dated 02.10.2010 in this regard
are annexed alongwith present complaint for the kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court as
ANNEXURE- 1 1 S 11 • Y. That in the light of abovementioned facts its clearly transpired
that the accused persons in connivance of Govt. Department's officials, who
facilitated the accused persons and issued wrong reports for their own monetary gains
and against the interest of the investor/buyers and nation, which amounts to
disobeying the law with intent to cause injury to any person with fraudulent intent and
framed incorrect document by knowing that the same will cause revenue loss to the
nation, which are also cheating & fraud on the part of accused persons. z. That the
accused persons must have paid the bribe to a great extent in The several departments,
its officials and staff persons in order to avail the benefits for themselves and against
the complainant and national interests. Hence huge monetary benefits availed due to
wrongly obtaining the completion certificate from the Delhi Development Authority,
Delhi Urban Art Commission etc. etc. in order to show that the project of the accused
persons was completed before the Common Wealth Games a a. That the accused
persons in order to save their skins and in order to cheat the bonafide purchasers
changed the everything on the pretext of revised site plan without intimating to the
Investors/buyers with the active connivance of Govt. Officials and there is clear cut
cheating and fraud on the part of accused persons, because, there was no reason or
ground to change the site plans and all this happened with the active connivance of
accused persons with each other. bb. That the accused persons misused their nexus
with the Govt Officials against the buyers/investors and ignored all the rule &
regulation of allotment from the D.D.A. and resold the allotted area in parts on the
arbitrary rates, which are contrary to the law of this land arid great cheating & fraud
on the part of accused persons cc. That the accused persons collected a huge amount
from wrong commitments and illegally collected money, which had been utilized by
the accused persons to bribe the Govt. Officials, which should have been used on the
project dd. That there is recognizable difference in the construction of Hotel Area in
comparison with shopping area and used very inferior material in the shopping area
because the same was already sold by the accused person and used very good quality
construction material and superior stone on the flooring of the Hotel Area, because the
92
same was let out on lease by the accused company and its directors, which amounts to
cheating, fraud and criminal' breach of Oil the' part of accused persons with the
complainant. It is further submitted that this fact could be verified by anyone having
general prudence. ee. That the accused persons managed to attract the bonafide
purchaser and im1ocent investors in a very professional way because they are doing
the same business for the last several years and used to threaten its own bonafide
investors/buyers after accepting huge money from them. Because the accused persons
are big guns and habitual offenders and used to threaten by saying that "tliat they may
deduct the 15% of the amount and no one can succeed from them due to having big
legal network and link & liaisons with the high class Govt. Officials including
Bureaucrats & Judiciary and if anyone will try to indulge them or their company in
litigation in that case on the basis of their one sided agreement they may contest for
several years in courts and finally will not pay or return any single penny to that
investor/buyer and further rebuked that their case will be finalized in Supreme Court
of fudia and Supreme Court of fudia may not pass an order during the lifetime of any
aggrieved person. ff. That the complainant is not the only person, who is cheated by
the accused person. But, there are several other persons, who paid their hard earned
valuable amounts to the accused persons due to their wrong commitments and in this
way accused person makes the several persons and cheated them also in the same
manner and have made it a business to cheat the people. Because the complaint before
the EOW. Cell was made by several investors. gg That neither the accused persons
nor the department i.e. D.DA. and its officials are interested to disclose to the
complainant that on which terms & conditions the land for the project was allotted to
the accused company and what was the policy framed for the accused company to
develop the same or that the accused company was entitle to collect the money from
the public without developing the same, nor the accused company, its director,
officials and representatives are paying any heed to the request of the complainant for
providing the site plan to her, other relevant noting of the department officials in file
or that the complete file of the accused company. This clearly shows the active
connivance of each other in order to defeat the right of the complainant. hh. That the
inferior construction in tree shopping area, which is sold to the buyers and using
I
i
superior materials in the hotel area, which will be remain with the accused persons
and bifurcating arid partitioned the whole project which reduced the total shopping
area into two separate shopping area after inducting the intervening wall, which will
93
certainly not attract the good footfall and the very purpose of the complainant
defeated due to the wrongs of the accused persons. And the abovementioned facts are
sufficient to ascertain the attention of his Hon 1 ble Court against the accused persons
for the just adjudication of the matter and far judging the cheating & fraud on the part
of the accused persons.43 That the accused persons dishonestly induced the
complainant and other investors/buyers to part with substantial amount of rupees and
the accused persons deliberately and dishonestly did not disclose the real facts to the
complainant regarding the affairs/ dealings of the company as tl1e accused knew tl1at
otherwise the complainant would not have parted with the huge amount. Thus the
accused persons have committed offences u/s 406/407 read with section
415/420/100/120-B/34 l.P.C. besides the offences committed under the prevention of
corruption acts by toe Govt. Officials, if found during investigation by the police. 44.
That the said accused persons had created false declarations with the complainant &
other buyers and also in Government offices with the help of Govt. Officials, thus the
completion certificates from the several departments were obtained by the accused
person. The accused persons have thereby committed the offence with the active
connivance of Govt. Officials and made wrong representations before the concerned
department's in order to get several benefits but failed to fulfil their obligation towards
the bonafide buyers, which has create valuable legal rights in their favor and the same
is valuable security within the meaning section 30 IPC. Hence, these persons have
also committed the offence of 11 Forgery of Valuable Security11 punishable U/s 467
!PC. Further, the accused persons have created the above mentioned false
documents/declarations for the purpose of inducing and to cheat the complainant, thus
the accused persons committed the offence of 11 Forgery for the purpose of cheating",
punishable U/s 468 !PC. Further as they used the wrong declarations as genuine.
thereby they committed the offence of 11 using a Forged Document as Genuine 11 ,
punishable U/s 471 IPC. Further as all the above mentioned accused persons has
connived with each other in finiherance of their common intention of their all and
they all induced complainant to pay them and caused the complainant a huge
wrongful loss of her valuable amount. 46. Thus, it is clear that they acted in
connivance with each other having their hands in same glove, thus, they all committed
the offence of Criminal Conspiracy beside the cheating & fraud with bonafide
purchasers. 47. That it is evident from the above mentioned facts and circumstances
that accused persons in collusion and connivance with each other, deliberately
94
malafidly and property of the complainant which were under the control, custody and
entrustment of dishonestly misappropriated the ,money and the accused person and
they misused the same their own benefits and hence committed the offence of
criminal breach of trust as defined U/s 405 IPC as they all were the beneficiary of the
commission of the above said offences and as they all were having well in their
knowledge that the IPC punishable U/s 406 IPC. 48. Further, all abovementioned acts
and omission are wrongful in nature, but, still they went ahead in commission of the
above mentioned offences with their aforesaid modus operandi, causing the
complainant a huge wrongful loss upon having a Criminal Conspiracy & Common
Intention, contemplated U/s. 120-B and 34 IP.C. The accused persons have wilfully
and intentionally aided each other in their acts with respect the offences complained
above and also by their omission and commission abetted the offences Complained
within the meaning of section 107 I.P.O. and hence have committed offence U/s. 109
I.P.C. 49. That as the accused persons have committed cognizable offences U 406/407
read with section 415/420/109/120-B/34 IPC within the jurisdiction of Police Station
of E.O.W and the complainant lodged complaint before the police station against the
accused persons which was duly acknowledged as received on 16.05.2011 vide D.D.
N 4963. (Copy of the complaint dated 16.05.2011 is annexed herewith as
ANNEYURE-T 50. That being aggrieved from the acts of the accused persons and
suffering a huge wrongful loss and a huge wrongful gain to the above mentioned
accused persons, the complainant prefers this complaint before this Hon'ble Court.
PRAYER It is therefore, most respectfully prayed before this Hon'ble Court that view
the above mentioned facts and circumstances of the present matter, this Hon'ble Court
may be pleased: (1) To take cognizance again the accused persons and to summon, try
and punish the accused persons for the commission of the above mentioned
cognizable offences in accordance with law. (i)To pass any other and further
relief/order which this Hon'ble Comt teems fit and proper in accordance with th facts
& circumstances of the case so as to be in the interest of justice as well as of the
complainant/petitioner. Sd/- English Complainant ASSOCIATES Advocates DATED
For PATH FINDER (INDIA) LAW FIRM/TM 3/115, RAMESH NAGAR 100) To
The Duty Officer, P.S-EOW, Malviya Nagar New Delhi It is submitted that an order
dated 14/12/11 by the Court of Sh. Rakesh Pandit. Ld. ACMM., Saket Court, New
Delhi U/s 156 C CPC passed on the complaint of Smt Rachna Arora has been
received, directing therein to investigate the matter after lodging a FIF From the
95
contents of complaint prim a facie an offence U/S

406/407/415/420/467/488/471/109/1208/34 IPC is found to be made out. A case
under above said sections may be registered and copy FIR and original Rukka n may
be handed over to me for further Investigation. Date 4 Time of occurrence December
2006 onwards Place of Occurrence: S-1. American Plaza. International Trade Tower,
Nehru Place. Nev Delhi Date & Time of handing over Rukka 16/12/11 at 9:30 A.M.
Sd/- English SI ARUN KUMAR, D-4301, PIS NO.18080210.ALBR/EOW D-
16/12/11 Action taken at police station at this time SI ARUN KUMAR, D-4301. PIS
NO.16080219,ALBR/EOW came in the police station and produced the above
mentioned complaint for the registration of case. Case has been registered. Copy of
FIR and original Rukka is being handing over to SI ARUN KUMAR, D-4301, PIS
NO 16080219.ALBR/EOW for further Investigation. Copy of FIR will be delivered to
concerned officers through DAK. W/HC/DO.
13. Action Taken (Since the above information reveals commission of offence (s)
u/s as mentioned at item no. 2:
(i) Registered the case and look up the investigation

OR
(ii) Directed (Name of the 1.0.): Rank:
PIS Number: to take up the investigation,
OR
(iii) Refuse investigation due to
OR
(iv) Transferred to P.S. (name): District:
On point of jurisdiction.
F.I.R. read over to the complainant/informant, admitted to be correctly recorded
and a copy to be given to the complainant/informant, free of cost:
R.O.A.C.
14.
Signature/Thumb Impression of The Complainant/
Informant
Signature of
NAME:
96
•
RANK:
RANK:
P IS NUMB ER:
15. Date and Time of d ispatch to the court:
I
' '
712122, 12:49 PM delhihighcourt.nic.in/dhcqrydisp_o.asp?pn == 165709&yr=2013 97
CRL.M.C. 763/2012 and CRL.M.A. 2678/2012 Annexure - D
EROS RESORTS and HOTELS PVT LTD andORS. Petitioners
Through : Mr. Akhil Sibbal, Ms. Malini Sud and Ms. Vidhi Goel, Advs.
versus
STATE and ANR ... Respondents
Through : Ms. Ritu Gauba, APP.
Mr. Vineet Bahl, Adv. for Intervenor.
Mr. Manish Gandhi, Adv.

for complainant.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA
ORDER
29.08.2013
1. The learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the petitioners
have settled the matter with the complainant, Raclma Arora. It is
submitted that in terms of the said settlement, the petitioners have
already made some payments and have to make the balance payment of
Rs.45,00,000/- to the complainant in full and final settlement. It is
further submitted that the demand draft for the said amount is ready and
can be handed over to the complainant in Court.
2. The complainant, Rachna Arora is present in Court along with her

husband, Sumit Kumar Arora and she confirms the settlement. She further
delhihighcourt.nic.in/dhcqrydisp_o.asp?pn==165709&yr=2013 1/4
712122, 12:49 PM delhihighcourt.nic.in/dhcqrydisp_o.asp?pn=165709&yr-2013 98
confirms that Rs.45,00,000/- is due and outstanding from the petitioners
� in full and final settlement of all her claims against the petitioners.
She is ready and willing to accept the said amount from the petitioners
in Court. She further submits that the petitioners have to hand over the
TDS certificates. She further submits that there are some other terms in
the agreement which both the parties have to comply. She further submits
that she has engaged Mr. Manish Gandhi, Advocate who is present in Court.
She further submits that the previous counsel, Mr. Vineet Bahl, also
present in Court, may be discharged.
3. Mr. Vineet Bahl, Advocate present in Court has no objection to his

discharge in view of the new counsel appointed by the complainant.
4. Mr. Vineet Bahl, Advocate for the complainant is discharged. Mr.

Manish Gandhi, Advocate has already filed his power of attorney which is
taken on record.
5 The learned counsel for the petitioners has handed over a demand
draft for Rs.45,00,000/- to the complainant, Rachna Arora in Court in
full and final settlement.
6. The complainant, Rachna Arora confirms the receipt of the said

demand draft in terms of the settlement between the parties. The
complainant, Rachna Arora has also handed over an affidavit dated 26th August, 2013
confirming the terms of the settlement which is taken on
record.
7. The learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the TDS
certificates shall be handed over to the complainant within the statutory
period.
8. The learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the FIR
No.245/2011, P.S. Economic Offences Wing under Sections
406/109/467/407/120B/468/34/471/420 IPC be quashed in view of the
settlement between the p�rties.
9. The learned APP for the State submits that the said FIR was
originally registered on the complaint of Rachna Arora with whom the
petitioners have now settled. The learned APP for the State further
submits that later on some more complaints were received by the police on
the directions of Metropolitan Magistrate under Sections 156 (3) Cr.PC
out of which the complainant has settled the matter with 9 other persons
namely, Shanta Kapoor, Seeta Chopra, Sangeeta Sharma, Sbikha Jain, Pradeep
Khanna and Renn Khanna, Sarabjeet Kaur, Rakesb Jain, Pankaj Manektala and
Vipan Sarna. The lea1·ned APP for the State further submits that two more
complaints are pending with the police.
10. The learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the two other
complaints pending with the police are separate causes of action and this
Fm was filed only on the complaint of Raclma Arora with wbom the
petitioners have settled the matter. It is further submitted that this
delh[hlghcourt.nic.i nfdhcqrydisp_o.asp?pn = 165709&yr=2013 214
712122, 12:49 PM delhihighcourtnic.in/dhcqrydisp_o.asp?pn=165709&yr=2013 99
settlement would not in any manner prejudice the two complaints pending
"' with the.police.
11. The learned APP for the State submits that it may be clarified that
the quashing of this FIR and the settlement between the petitioners and
Rachna Arora and 9 other complaints would not prejudice the two
complaints pending with the police and the police shall investigate the
same and take appropriate action in accordance with law. Subject to such
clarification being made, the learned APP for the State has no objection
to the quashing of the FIR in question subject to the cost being imposed
upon the petitioners.
12. The learned counsel for the petitioners has.no objection to this
course of action.
13. This Court is satisfied that it is in the interest of justice and

to maintain peace in tbe society that the FIR in question be quashed.
14. The petition is allowed and FIR No.245/2011, P.S. Economic Offences
Wing under Sections 406/109/467/407/120B/468/34/471/420 IPC and
proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed subject to cost of
Rs.4,00,000/- to be deposited by the petitioners with the Prime
Minister?s National Relief Fund for being utilized towards the
rehabilitation of victims of recent Uttarakhand tragedy� The cost be
deposited within a period of one week. The original receipt of deposit
of cost be filed before the learned Trial Court and the copy thereof be
handed over to the Investigating Officer.
15. It is clarified �hat quashing of this Fm shall not in any manner
affect the case of any other complaint pending with the police and the police shall be at
liberty to take appropriate action in accordance with
law.
16. The pending application stands disposed of.
17. Dasti.
J.R. MIDHA, J
AUGUST 29, 2013
aj
delhihighcourt.nic.in/dhcqrydisp_o.asp?pn=165709&yr=2013 3/4
·----�-
.. .
7/21 22, 12:49 PM delh ihi
g
h
c o
u
rt
. ni c.in/ d h
cq rydi sp_o.asp?pn 1
=6 5 70
9&yr= 2
013 100
$
2 5
delhihighcourt. nic. in/dhcqrydis p_o.asp ? p n= 165709&yr =2013
4/ 4
Annexure - E 101
:
: ...... .
. •,
. ·, .·.
·- .
·--.
... · :,,. ;
· A. . h,
I•
1·
-.
,·
, ..
,..._. . ,•
·,· .
..
,,; I�
•
• ·1
. . 1
.
. . .-.. ...
j
:
•·
, . .. .. .. .
••,
I.
I. '
I •1.i,·,�
....
\.._ . •-:
,illll_•.::f)►n m.111111;1.1. , Iii '.
I I I ' I, 102
"
1
. . I •
. .{D 1�·;.i,·� .. . ,.
·1- · .:.· _:.;.:��::.:i-�--:-:r:· F�:..:.

·• •• ' f t, t
• : ■ :• I IMfllJ.t .. ,_1--•I
.. .. ..
.. , I •• .. •I
• , .... , .. t_,_
I ; •
;•
l.....·...
,
I .
. ' .
.. .
· 103
. .. .
. . .
,
...
. : "'.. ·t"\t,·.....� . .
·'
·'.
.. .
,
e ·. .
. .
L
.. •'
!
:i.
•
I ►'
. ·'·
. ....
I
. . .,
..·:. . . . .
' I
. •:.. ·.
.J •
. .... .. .
• t
.
. .
. . ..
•• I o
•,
. . ..
•• ♦ ••
•
. ,·, .,
.. . . ·.. . . · . .
104
;I I,
· .
i
I. I.. ·.·. .·:
. . •.
!�
'll!ll
I•
I.
, ..
.
i !
.. . 'i i
"' 13 .' :·
• ·'1'
P,i;, ,�U,ors -.,;. wi\��·�·· ..x,,m ,n.�, . . . ; -.. ...,... - . ::. �: ;.;.._ I ,f'•:\-: ·
I. · ... _.. • List at·�aohed .
. • .... ·•. .. . · ·. · . .· , ·•---.. ·-··---....
.· · 1· \ 4. � .: ,: .I; 1 r, �R:.r,. ia1,e, lndl�".i,c· i<cu.o n t�� · , , � piciPOi'e�':lii°1iO"tWJn·': ·
.. · . · ... ,. . . . I · · WW
... ..• ••••
•.
, " .•.:'· -'• · .
:
• I � • • •
·., . , .;I · . , ; �- ..·
, .l, . . · 211 IPC- : Np · .
. I : .. - -.�-- .. "-·· ..... ·.,.. �� .. .

.; t-! ••,
:' ·. •:,-;
r , •: � . • J• .. : , ..::-· ..
;:· •• �
,; I • • • • '. •-. • .��• .,, ••• ;__•,_;,_ • •
,•'} •' t , . .. • ......... ·.: ...,.··= --··-

',__;,:_�
N,•••.••
IA'." •
·-·- .•
· .: :.),.•,(
...
·,:---
•:' •
. . . .;... ...
•••":-•••••••.,,:,.,u_,_,.,.,.
�•• �:.,
.
16,
.
·:•
, .. _,_:,---+!,..:::.:,-:,o
I
• • .
: .....
,,. •• •-•u••--•"-••�
...
,��,�.
Sir,
1 ·;
: .
.
.
, ..
. ..
. .,
..
' .
.. .. .
. '- ...
· .... 105
· . .-, . �-� ·-.
.' ..
· ·..t·--;1�-·-,-· .: : � 1
. .
: , . A.., ,1 ,
. - : •k: .. 1,,... •.·• • •
..
. • • ••
.i· •�'f.-f.-:�
•• • • :1- •
f } ··� . '
.
.... • I • o • I o : ; I � 1., • .:. • •'/, • I • •!°';-•••·,
., .... I :•'••
t• 1:••
.• . .
IO O 4 I •
•, •
' ::•
.
I
• •
. .
•
. .•
• • •
•
l} 00, t 9. · 1 1· .- Mr. Dipui1<.§ir.P�ll!ll {Ari
•
• •
.;. • •.
. I ..... ••
• � : •• _; • I
•
_ . :hi�i:.'l} .57, Mal'\1 �'ha �ulitiing: Neh �
o1:lhiJ l 100) 9. 12: Mr ..O.a.nc11h Rai ,h.ftwJa � Pl, :
ce: . s.\i/·. •.. ;
( E:ngj
Pvt. 1..ld, ·5•A, . D:D.A'. ·Ji'laL's, Surai il\Jllcmt-1 n •p ¢t,,·.J1,1nej� Tc:cho' G9.;1 , .. � :·. ..
· , Ne� ' � clhl-l. l0025.' '13." :M r' '. . 4if .
. Shu rm. a (f? i rnc7 l �>r ·or ·r�oi>ms) S)o S_h. '?h-a , er �hekh er :R J 2-J t · _; .• .
·11pur1.m.c11l11 1 Miiyu-r Vlhar1 �h�sc:�1, Nuw , � 91 � · Ii� : . ·. ·_.
. Del 1 l.!00�2 .. 1.4.,;..))y, �jl r- .. o)r
{1311ig) e&.r Dcl_hi Dovcil<•>Pment"/1: Jlh 1 :, .: •.;.
� �rity,·vi Uf:��dan, l�A, �cv.: Ofl. h.
l)i:pu1.y Hcalt,h 9rnc:- r �h�1·bd-ara )5!. 1.
So�ll, Zo
Por A,ddiLiomil• Cm11missio.rinr l)f �Oli _ �p_ H��C �:l qelhi.. �6 • ./(y�/(. ·�f-.
N<iw. nt:lhi. :,:Ac,�tJSfi;l)/.ReSPOND (l(i u;1,:u ,} ), P.�. Ocr�hce. C.o y:: · .. ·' .
f�N'
�'20/.4<)f>J.4 01· 1�1�AD W1r1-1 s.i��·r·lcfN I', t( � l.,f.JN1' UNDER' seer. .
s-t�qrtdN 1q·�1.rjosy:14 I.PC ;,ic,iC().M 15/�2 )J 6!r/46sA11 'AN'b V.N
� ··...
PANt�· . 1,:H .�P l;'L. ICATfQ� p
S�C1'J()ril ·J,5f>(3f Gr. :P,C. tv1-0�•r N
1��$1'�¢'1'.�. I:' . Y SHOW�1'H:.
I. 'l'h1;11. ti),:_ ::ic:<:uiwd,' Nc,. l ln :5 �rn !
_ acc:uscd' c: i.�Pf.111y anc;I h s. -direc �
�1<;1:� 1si.•d-' No. f� lo IC� arc� c:mY>!<iy< t rs. · ·d
_ i1rn 1.1nd1:r t\11: •• t,:<ill�cd no; l ·co·
No. 11 -l�, 1 � �re .pro�<:ilsfon�ls, 5 �nd· ice ed
g-ivin!� � r�m g un-dcnc1l<ing1i :i;!. nd.
who fac!liuil :dj tht: .ac1a.1$eq 'Nc1
_ , :1 to . _ , �- ·. · : ··
�1
_ '. :1irLrti <at\C:1i· cf1> rc the severa l dt;!paft. t�
·and accused No 13 als1>.hovc a¢l1vc . _
<:Mmv�in c !Wit
�C(:Usbd: i 4. Lo . 16: arc· lhc. Om,L. h accused No. l. tort d
oHiqiuh; .b i�g -head of DcYA;. Me
Liccn�i11if 1·1:sp1:� Livc ly_. anQ, issudd
accused _No. I l�. !'3, in activt: _C<>nn e
wrong/(al i certif!bate� in tn. .
o .d .
� �a • ; ;l)f ' .
fy�nc:c v:i�h usc 'd No, ,J: to :io.a_n� '.d ' .
·1() pr.rfc>rni l�e.,!'· o m� ial d.u Li es. ana
_ _ _ , �itiusing t er' powers;.Th�t there m
�1�vc_ral oLhcir person�/ �cP,art rrvmtal offl :j · ·. b' : .
cial·s j, may b� fQl,l�d as 4�c_ ·
dl:lring invesUg,lliori on the 'j:m:::icn _
t complair.il ·
; Ji . •
2. 'l'ha l lh.e.ac·c:u�ca No. I W!:\s· ab! • • � t ' ' · · .:_ .: ·.· :· _ � ;'.• ....
<: to gciL ulfo.� etjt of �a.lti-4b.le lari •
' • \ •
<!lwup · rates ·rmrn. lh() Ol:>A, whc>" had d ·orr tt . ••
I.
c1uci'U< riqd <>ff land in· th'e NS:t' · '
. . CEl pitui'-�cgion, (NC I�) ( 'lhc .- · · · ..
I":-�,-"..
I ��· ·pr�lC:Xl of
1.h() qDA· lrnd pu� ;in ph1cc �- sch�:mc ,cc,mmo . V,ci�lch Q��cs. �o l := � :- bJ?·: : � .: .
.
. C{lll(!(:ssim,a-
1 rfllC!S wi.Lh additional' b'1mefils d,(1, pile
!or ttLIOL c>�/tcnd.cr o.f", · $3. hot el f l�, it. .. .
cne raci , fo riat · ( } . :·. .
c�m�: ,: . .- ;, ..
mm_d f�r,-_Lh< :.'stttnc. ll is ,alsq w,or. th 0 the re!W, "'
_ _ -n;icnlion 'h l+ th'a�· �h��C� S ed
0
was bou.nd lo do,vclop.L�(� s.1:1.i d lan d prior lo -_ornmcm W��h �ame(-

. bul mis.eri1bly failed lo do \m intentiimal . 2· : ' .·
ly ii n jn i>rder t_a,:jt,,,a�J tho:f(� . ·· �. . ;· ..
boncfilii,Jrom tlii: vur!<>.u s Cfovt:. Qcpa.r rrwn �· .
� _; r '11-iely show��t-s .:proje�q?� :. ; � · .' •·
. , lo be: 1,pcm1Liorrnl 'b<lforo Comrtion
Wmrlth ,<l. trios :2010 -�P. ,$evpr�l: ,: · _ 9, :-
, ,
<:c�rl.if.icat� 1;1,nd .au -lhi� C()\,i!� -�1:1.VC:
of q ov t, ,fjfn ciµJ , . . I t Is r
'
u r\h dr_ su bm!ttcd that o e y�hmg �;r. tlo*-,¥:
j't
happc:ncd <f wl�h thp·��v �; C:"OR!jlt . . . , •.
f .- : .. ':..
·. on pa P•r • n d . •�1u l\ l, � : , . · .
. ' . ..... . t ,
..
� I story, �•1'
. . .
/1, �u!te _ d '. ffere tJ . . {;;; · · : t .:.): .;- · . ·. . · «l)
3, T� a v fn)i,e m<>rith o(,·D'.,,;'� her. 20_96, tho .
"'"? · . • . ..j * '' .
':,;:_th� � : :,',·_:;' '· . :_ _..
i' '.
. , ,: ? Co� .\
_. q m:c t<>r �
�1 ·an olhr.r offrc�al,s ·ap�r?ac.hec! l� .
r.: :' • • . . c ·p bi. c. �1th t· 1� •• -�
. . . ,;,,-r,111· . . � •• i . �: •. r,/ •_ • :
�.1• �.
• • ;,�l(: !j� '; •J • < • 'l • "

!:. I J
;., :•:.1:· �·I .>.,• ,.•·: · . •

.,. � '; t
• ' •• • 1 l',i1
. ...
,..
•.:i ,
l\ . ,.
" •' _. .
. t
•:' :,!1�·1;.' .. '1tij , 1UJ/ J.•'••. • • -

.
. •• ► • ·
,}-.\':/• • •· : .-h. .•••• ' ,;,.

i
• "�1t�:'
. ..' . • • • • ••
-'
1· \f ·• . . · · ·- .·
,: 3,•,� .. .
. "':.1.., • · · 'i�,t..• : ·� t�•·. • •
••.....,_;:
I I • ,,�)
4;•;r•t:: 'J" •
.
: I•
• 1
• ·-:·r� • , 1�. 1 I. -
· .• . .
• I
·.•.
106
I.
- ..
. · .. I I••
I •• • .' ,•
.
• .. �. •' " : � • �- . <. ,.
. ... I ,. .,. •• · i ·.:
.
. • •:IQ ' ; . ;..:: .
• • • •• iI •• • • \;•t; •.
c:_� :9·tclch_\.ircs a.10·11� wif . f �$\

,�•J
' • •• • • • • • •
11t11·fl l(o�1 r;i.1.f1<:ws papcri;,_ nnd on In �crr1<:l: 1 Js's\.

pt:(1\w�:mul<lriul_ in "(>.rd�r l<�:collccl 1:1 �u�c -a.mount _from t�9 .'P.� hf-��.·
showh�g.a V(ll'Y ro�y pl<:l�'irc ,al')q wilh rulsc cim �lLmc�ts an_d ·as_syr� ·es·. _Ptd_-;. ·.
in this wav 1110LiVf�Wd the prt:sr.nt ci�n1:pl�1ini nl an.d he;r hus�an-tj • es.t cs
many nth<;r. bom,ridc: :riL1rc:hc1:;crn .';:H1.d wc:ri�·. olc: _le� ·.r.t�l!��r c>V-er. a .�ii: 7:n, .: . -;. :·
'
·
l.hous-and rup1:�s.by 1n;s1.1r.i1,·g lhc:-foHoJJ.iii,�• 1.hi1 ��.... '. · .... ,'. · .....
• • ' • . • I ,. •••
r. · ·. -: '• . .'
·
a. 'ftiat. ll°lt:ir P.r<Jj!:cl. i�- b f111r.� on on� Dub,1i bt\S d 1imila _ ; . ho�ol•c1;1rn ��"<?'R · . 9a).. .... · .
. arcade- projc11:t und s<'>fd ,lhc .1111ur,Ac by d<:Ht:rib ng'. ,iLs prc>jeq_L �s- ·''I'� ' ,F- ·� · . ·.
"AR'T .o;F s· .STAR· �H(p'PP!.N0 WlTH .];:ROS :a U�E.Y�RO HOTEL ..��o. '·IP ....,... :
. ' . Pt,AZA;, ·M,ti;YUR-
•
ViRAR,
•
� NEW'
• •
DEI.Hi, · 'hc'•rn• by, ·• ·it..· •
was • i;peMfig
I
ll)q ·. ·
ll')c:nli<>.n(:d \trnt "iri ,_,h'i: lu�h t:_xc:ll_li-(v1:'·c�nv1ron. of f�r·m,- .8?\,lltiva�d·, sqop rs·
•
. . . .., .
wm·cxppric:nc�<i'an �m�ii:ncc,llkc·ncvm·.bc:J1>iV,� d n9 place eise,"_. \ · ..
. r •
. .. • • :. •. • ., • •· ••
· b. T-hc1l A ·lr1,1fy P l'<!mh.1;;;· 5 -�i.ar cx1,cricnc:ti ,,;,,i.Lh '}. bci1..1quct oC"selecL:brary�s. r at.
11
will �c:u1Jai1;1blc: L<i'lhb di·scc,rnh1g l>hoppt:t:. n·cxperfen�c trat.w,m.'rew. lte·•.- ·. · · :_.

Lh� rµ_Hrn M rt:1,iJiling iJ,'l1;idip.. 11
• ,
::. • • •••
0
•
•• • _· • • • •
• � • '.
• • � • • • ._ • • • •
C, Th�ll "ov.c·r 1,00,oooi •. s'qµarc; feel of prr.m\u . S�<>pping, loc;ated wi 1 in I : 5

' 1 • • ' • • � • ' • '• • • • •
• I 1
slai- Ml1Jxe h(>(d w1,th 350 rooms.&. i.milC:{;,; ex :luslve servfoe aP.irtl'n6 tsj 2�
0
· roof. .t" p.. .: ar; .

• •• � ' • . • •,
.. hrs
l
. ··!Ill.: tl,. ?-Y •dining, mull!

• . '
.cuisine 'spcotalt · rcs�ti.\Jra.nts,

• • ••
·
' .
-l�n.ciue : b,�sipcss: �r.f1W[,.'5P.�f, bcrnlth c:lLtl�.i" bo.i,yt1 par.lour ·and a: b� .�1ri ·
� �
.. . '.
...
shop.P ., · · · ' · ·· · .;
·4
�J ·
•
• • • • ... ·:-.
•
· · · d, �l'hai "it v.·ill be a' .lr_i&ult:. w Lt).,: fin.c� Lhlt:JgS , r lire,. And a t�;cim6ny •ti'i:i
• • • •
,, : • J • •
■
.
_ru1.ur1! o-r rc:i.,til."..
. .- . • •
. .. . . .
. • . .
. .·-· .... -1··..·,.-;f�·!
•
..
. 'f ;s'' 'I .
.. . . ;
e, Thal •Ero�. Bmtl_!:var(i will �c- the pr.rfc�:L sui.g �� grq\.Jn9 fD_t a. � s�at:1f.� a�Y.-::
rcv<>lutro;i,
. Spread over : l ,0(),000 sq. Jt .. · cross. two -1�"'.cls, theji If.§ n;. f
m,v ircm.��nl, is .�f.Lllplcd w!th' an Ul:��v<:ring ·,wr:. f�)r. d·c:�tail, �-a:�cr.1��i . ·.
l,sndsc<¾p111g design uu11Lhct1c:i;·," . . : ·. , . · . . :I•· <
';i:
• • •
.��e. � a.
• t
• ' •
r. Thul "l;d rin<;ll� ·i� umc:riili<l; -· making il :rfec� ·�e.tti�i:fiir'. W()r.l -��
cxp1,ricrfot! wh<:rr, cv,c!ry v�sit' ahd cyc:ry or.6asio 1,ill a ·metXi.&�t�e �nq ll· ��b --��·
sh<>ppc,r5rund· n:tu.ilcrs: N · : · . · _. .- .
i£•.:} 'f.;�
J
■ O O •
ab �far s \ ;·-•:. . . :;
I : : ' :••• O :· ♦ t • \
g. That "E; ()s 'Boulnw.1.rd - Its, nol .o•nly abd.t.1l fc utfall :but r��··tts.'
O ♦:•: O
ri i;°\"('l,.,• I • • � I
· · · ·•r·J,�'c · • . ! . : t :,.: .
I
·
�
quuh1y CJ rootfoll.
I
::
t I 1• t I I •
r,,t • •
... ,,,,! •• ·•�
O
•
��r:.\tJ.·. :.: : .. _.
..
■: :•:
,.� • I
·11-· h. 1'hu_1. '.'A=prc:n,ium sh(>pping c.l<:stinution iwL in �1 sup�r p�en�}�:,li:� st�y11��\

I • j I t, • o
• 1 I t, 0 0 1
,.
: i ,�.t. "'' . · ·. c:nv1rn1��1'.r�L: f)iffc�c:n�iaL<:� <:x_p�!rit:n�:tis tliat',11 ._rc��fihc t�;��,1/-Y.,, �h;�

, 0 ,
' '. ,I •
••I' • t
•
•
'
•,
.
;1--
' · •.
•
1
'
• I
. ;
• I •••
• •
:,"'• •":• •
1-.1,i:,
• •
, , ,•�·.•);I
;:•• �-
,� '
O I
' . :'
. ,� .. ,. · · ,:, ' . . · ... - . . /Iii

·:,._,,..._:,,··· ;_{(
: :,! \<:
.:J ; .. . �i ,-
•••
., .
• •
.,.. ,,... ., .
'y• ,,,11,: •••• ,;
..,., ..
�
.
:. ·•\.1 t
.. � :,
.•,11. ·.•
.... :, •'
. i�• :•
. �
t·
I •,
.. . .
',•
V.·
.
• i t
,. ', .
•••
·0'""· . -
. '
'
.. •.
' . .. '
. . -�...�- .. .
....
:, 107
. ·,
.'
..�.4
: : ·: .......,. . ·.
'
1 · ·: •..
' I •,•
-i I
1 ·. ; .'
, ..
I·,. _ . ,. ·.-\· ... .
t
•, •
' '
·r i.
r ;,
,�:c-l�d·stiop1 c:n·L_c:rlf,�ln, �.1nd· i;��t1lge, t'Mnk-about ,il .and go f0( il.� 1
• I. . . . . . •' . • . .' •
.. . .. . ·. . .
i, _That ·•e11joy _.li-1,:. assu1'f;nct: <ff. ii. :rim11ldabl<; al\� of ..H<�t.e)" ShE).l1gri- a. Ne�.
. · Oulhi; l:!·plel-; lntc.ir ·qimlli:"<�nta� Ercrn.'Nn!\ru·
' . Place; _New.. OcJh'i-.· Ert>t f � f°i��ra:i
'l'uwc:'r'�ClltiyJl)t:lhP' •. : · ·.
.. .
" ,' · ·. ' ··.::
. :. . .
j. 'l'hi.�.l. ''.liros l,(rCll,ljl h�; scrl_p t<:d Mme or 11'\0,!-\\ in-no�utivc i:\,aptcr i n ;e t ¢Rtat�
0
· -d�vt:l<>pmcn-1 hospiLa·\.iLy. c1nd . lown plal\f,ling f�,r. iwc:r' 60 y�a1\;. I:, ea.dtrl'g ·
.. co�pm:at$i h<->us�:; it .h�s · ·c\�c:i�- JnrnrnsL 111 '.l�?ui rest�it? ·oc�el9P,rnent 1 h�vln�- ...
· dt:�t�lqped lciwn:-ihip,s �1nd h()u�h,g p1•<iJ,�<;ttdi� �md ar.<11.md·. Oelhi. 1'he roup's
1-.indrirntl< projects i.11· the rcstdc"tyLiul, ·�wclor_ 'li\c�uf!e:��l,�k¢W,OO ..... 91.tY i _ .. '. -� ..'
l�oi-;cwood. City.,· .�r6i; .O.rand· Mun·sl.<ins••�.ind. BJ'.Q� Escale.d,e, !ts" :·tcrlirig'•
prcsc�cc· in Lhl: 'Hospl.lnll-lY' it'\QUSLry Is. li1Qrkcd �with �·he· 5 star' Hot I !ljter. ,e
C�nl.ini'l;iLU_\ �r911· in.. Nr;�ru Plucc u.n� 1-ltHt:I Shangrl�t.1r at. Cohnaugh Ptac� .. •. •.
. !Is corporate dt!vr.lopf.ncn·ts �uc mf.l�kcd by 1nlcma.lional �ra9c. Tower nd �he
\und�:ark t�r�n.; _Chrpo.r� Le {r,�w�rll!'. · , ... .
. .. . . · _ · . _. .:, ·.: ._.·,. '. ·
I<. Tha� "Wrth c:uch 1ittc:,c;cs�ru1 ,b;dy l �rcis.'Oi'ol.ip ha� ·l;)ee=n.'f;�l')�lati�g �;.;y �
0
• I
. ..- drc:urns t11Lo r�ality:_ :ro:day tros. Oroup-.i� n. force: to -rc'c�9n with,: �a:v�t"ig
prc,v1•n .Lr1H:I< rc<:urd '<.1.f .m�lnLulnb,g hi�l1 su1nda'r.O$_ or quaJ!ty/ 11af ty' at.td .:
fllturiS:tl�.ph.1M-ing: 11
• •
• :, • ... : • • • •• .' • • :
-1. Thal. n/;l 'IJ.!tlll '<tsr.ablishcd HoLCI i.e. l11lc(Cci�linentaJ and, corpbinctl $!'1 _pping.
t I I : 4 t •, • •· t ■ • t I •••
: ..
■• f • • • • t t I ■ t f t ■
I
0
urea or more Lh;in I lat!'S_q;fc i wilh W()rld da.ss.'ambienc:e ana: s-te.tc of 11't'Qne
' • 1
• 1
I • ■ • • • t • I '
_brand �)�. ho�<:\, .s.\al� _of. cla�i r and copy of Dubc1 i bti_se9 Five: s·1:�r �Qtel -f��
• ■ I ■ • • }
t I • • I I • t ••
,II .
I
l+tt,tlttt41 •' ■ ,.■
'
\ ■ ■ t •• I
Ali the .above rrl<mtionr.d ulLrucl1ve: assurance:. were {ntcntl<many. tne ti6ried · · ·
t I ,,. •
: ; • • •
:-.
t • '
:
I
f
•
�l,t�e. :A�t
:: ; • • t • • .
• . ' l· ·• � .
I
b)' 1:h,: :�c(:�·�c..d-pcrsc)Q� Co ·s ·for lhc p\.lTP;?ll(l �r cxtra�tiii :

rrom Lh_t: _pµ�hc•by n:i�-kmg a fool <>.f the .bo_nafidc P,Ur'chase�s!d�sp1tc c.;.f�ct . . .. a_
lhat ln�: ilC�US(lc:\ p<�rson!:' ,-':'JCi'c very mu�h: uwure .about t¾:.fa�f. th, �:�� •
were· n<:il ,going ti> c:<>Mti:ucl: aeonrdirlg l<> �her prc>posed. p�.- Photo. ��t�1 · · , ,
lht:• 'Qrnr,hurc ·C{>nt1l.ining lhc ab()VC:l mCl),lit)ncd assurances 'i�:·a;nne�(:•. �Afopg ...
ANNEXl, 1 ltE "A" (QOLLY) . . · . ·
I .,., ., •
·
• , •
with 1.hc:prc!sc,11p:ompl1:1inl.as
,
. · :· '. ':
!, : ,;\', :, •
• I
, I I
Lhci'r _pr��ose_d ·�t�_l'). tie ::�� , .'

• ■ f • I
�1ppr()Ul:hed, wiln
'.•
4. 1'lial_tli9;accusqd _P<lrscrns
• �
■
•
· ."qqmp.l�)( coi:npth,ing or II Hc1lc.l U>gt:lhcr.:wi1h ·u Slis>ppin•g :M�!U_PlC�i ):l;•W:�:

name upd 1>lyl<: 1ir lleron B9u.lcvurd 11 (:t��r i.11,ti�g or. ·Sh?W:,09mli ·' �. M�·-�t
! A'l'Ms / l{iol\kl-, or V,\l'iOUt-1 SIX.Cl\ ,Ul'ld. dlh�lll'\liJ!Hl� •. '·· . ••..•
.r�' '• i I
I.
:
�
,• :;; •• •
•
• ': ■ : �I
.=;, 1·h�1 i,i1' lhc morilh ,,r b_m;t:r'l'l\�er 2006, ·-lh<:: ttb<w_c natneq,:·.:t�fr��tt>f'.1Jf�� .
• ■ • •
I
I 1
fi
.
I , .. ■ • ■r,1••
, • • •
� . . .
·, · ' '·D2;t$. .• :·: . :;
::. . . . •,; : : . .f Jtt::�'.
. • r.· . ·� tn .�....
:1;{! '· •
' • :· • ,, ',t.. ;
iRU. ,:.:.'.). _:d11�:�•,.,·

''I. I pv•\-,;�•; :-"t:{}'fag,✓i i :_ :_
�-r'tJ� ., ·•.
••t
. . . . • . .
� · : : f: i-: ,��.;;1/·
, li,,
. , .. , .• •• 1. · · .... r.J·..�•1
.. . •IBi·" ,) • ,
...
1
108
;I I ·
r t14lif:Vri�Jll�;\U\�l��1¼;·;·••h., ·_, I 1._.:.----
I
!
..
I. .
�
. d,')l"\t,
V . .. . . . ..
·,•.' . : :! ··.· ... (
. ·,.:
1.::
; ', 1 ··..' ;:. . '. • ,,, .:
... I'·:··; .
..
• I I
l· · .:
I •• •• •
0
'
: • •• ·,,,, It" • • •• ·:
. .. . . •,·.
• /., I • ,. • • ., • 1 ..· ,,
: " ..,,,,
' .
1·r:i:m;1i,C:'(lLiHiV(;S or lhc!iA,c�·usc:d Gornpa�y irnd, i� ornic:cf Lr.re ·

c,>"mpl·�•i1! ? t �at
0
.·• , l�;l -�c<:u!wd, , ComP,�iny.·,' i,1rLC:nd1:d l<> Lin,< r. Lake

tht! �d.t;v�l.e>p · e.: . ·;. �-·
c:onstruttini·, flf l�lot Nb.' J:.1 A&, 13 t, in MavL r .lhar, Oistrict•C�rytr ,, ,.. l�i,:
·
O ♦ O
. 1.hri>1.1 gh: Lhc:ir ·pr.i-ntc:d l>ro<:hun:s <!f"!P .idv<:rLis m 'ht�·· '�his ··f.a,ct'
I • •
o
la,t�r ri: rn.i;.:· · ·

I ' f � • O O O • I \ f" I O t O
in ti,c l<tr�wludg!l _of th;l:, cfrin�plainr).nl thl'c)l.)p;h 1g <:tlmen�

th'at the ·fa.� . fc. ':�� ·. • ', ,
said proj<:<:L wcrn allo�Lcrd lo Lhci Ac:c;lJscd _qc )TI V.r.JY py C:,�fh'l �eve
o�. �n�f
· �Lllhor.i�y. 'vidp . all1ieinr.n'l lcllcr no. _r,'8 (\'2l/20Q6
/�Ll2J56 .. �er;i:'
:m,o6.20qo, und �hfs ,fac'l w1rn rrnv<ir r(:vwc1lo l > �he
cpmplafoanC o t·- bf
· <>lh<:r bY.v.cr .t>;,· the: �1cc:t.rRf:d ,No,, f 'w q iniLb1l· ·, ·How
ever,· �he· sary'lc: eY< : �c!·
(mm lh.e <:on LcnCirnf lliq _ugr1:.<:riwnL. · .- ·
. . ·. -
6. 'l'har. il Wtl�. ali:o ·rcprc:i;cnted le) tnc ,(
.
) () 1 lain·anc"•'�nd to tn her .
buy<;r;/pur<:ha�c:r/invci;Lc;r� by lhc:.' imid•. r p c_1tc:nt
u.tiye' ·or �h_q c: sed· ·.
Cnmpa,11:v. llHH ',tnc phy,�ic:�I IWSllCSs,idn CJ( � t.: s�id·
plot w�� t.a:�en b ·!the .
°
i\c:c:uscd Ce>mp�lny on. 06:-12.2006. 1'h'al il, a

' further r.epr�sehte· .tc, th,e. •
.(!t>n1piai��nt Lhai vidc Cl>nvt:y�tncc Dee
d ci� <:. 12: 12.2006 1 Che f •e otd ·
uwnt:�ship or'tli<:. said p!Ol hiis ·been, ·d\1iy
•�i; ·
f
'gr• t•d., cc>nveyed,.1>old, r. 'I'
I
. . . . , L ��l.n_i;fp,rr�lirnd ai;signr.d:in'l�, lhc·.n�m� ::tnd , I

L· r, . ur CJT lh,e �C<;\lse.�-Cq . /;.
tn.c
I·
7. 'rhaL
• '
;_ ACC !,.!Scd· Cc>m�any. thrqugh iLs Mr 'C (��6' a��j

t ,, • : • •, ' J
' re�1;esent� •:t·. tiie .

ccmiplaihanqhcit .l �<:: Ac:cuse.d Comptiny in ()�·
C to develo'p .the ·�w.iid . lo I th'e .; '
· · Ac:cu8�d'- Cbn'lpanyi b'c:ing a.· r�nown�d '!<:a
: ha_ving-':Y'fJSI: m<pcl'ic:nc:p; ki;icvclophig l�C!
i 'cl 1�l tc pr_Ol'J'\Ot� r. ·and. · d ��f vi.
sa!r pl )l in LO a ·complex <;:<>' pl i: 'in�
nr· i,, Hqtol lc>.gclhcr wi(h,a Sh<>ppiryg Com
804.h: v�rcj llicrcih ';lfl�r c:a.llc!d as O projec
pl·e'x i t�e.' ri amo·a�{sty_le of
0
J c:cin�.isting·, C>f Show r}'o'. :: 1/,
ro'�
Shop·s /: t)'rM8 i Kicii;k� c,f. ��rh>\rs i.i:-.e
s and di· ,,:i·�i9os, • . ; · ,.'; ·i ;: ::t
8. 'l'hm b�llcvin� the hiptcsc:!'lta.tlon.�, mt1.d
• dimc:1,or.i; 1rnd, 1.IULhorf:-.c:;f rcpn:scmuni'vr. pf-1.
r.· y_ the ·¥cct1.�cd· co1n'p ii�
n · <:°ouscid ·_Cpropanyt to b:�; r#'� . ' .. ·
_': .
i�:�. ·,· ·.
c111d au�hcntic, .the c:cim.plilinu
, (l<Llpc:es�· l�oun.c:cn· l:�c� 'i'hirty Sev
rH ·had ..paid' a · if,:nnt;tnt -o(��.: ,14,J· .,�,; gJf ·:
en iho�s]n ':Eighc·.H,u- drcq' ?- �{'i
f!ii�. ·
..�·
V·
. .
On, l yj tc-l, i.hc a�:c:us-r.d·t;omp�my on lhc
lhC! a_<:<�4scd coMpany.\1. W�\S:llnly-aflr.r
!)
fillsc r<: r1scntati9n�:.9f t-he of ff�l��
h1psi� >f nforc th a-r-].'f�u�m.o n- };i{ �ii'
f. :·
·.
•·:
Lht: uc�;,�� c:d. <: < >1t1�a·11�. cm Ltlr<t<J )ri I.<> a 'She��?. F ti, 'era Agre�
' (!�lied -.�fy <i, Aq ree merit'l with the CC,. ��nf (".her,!,�:. �\�1 _.,-...· ·:·•· · .
, l'T)pl�irt�lnl�() . ��t� .d�Y.-;�tf.pri
'
1�_ci_ � ut�� s<: o� th� �-ho_p Bearl�g- No_, -�}� l,' 'Q�. {{<fr . :
i:l ppmx-1�1 p wly·SL!·PC!r
5, cJn gr�� l;i1t�lfoor mt�.. ;pf; • . -..
A-rCJ,l of,595 ·�-�-. l'·�.. .' in_ 1. c Siji
Comp·a11,\1:on·.Lhc_pityn.1.�nt.Plc1n a.s.��c:c:
1 d _ p�o ��¢ �:io! t�e.
1r1cd 11 .• chedule.A·f!,��hcd \ ,t�, t,h:c
�?: ..,M. · ·
Agm�riu;11. 1.', Th,H it...is pcnincm ;le>._
m�:nti(\1 here, tt(� ·��-.for ·�t ,, �·
. contliL!�f a C>f_thc:-.su.id agrcemnnt �cm . •. • . .-_-
., :_compleL••� ,m.:, �i�:,��'.tot�lJ{�
�:IJ-- ·: : :_. ·
• :: • • :
: •, : • • I
•�:ti•, �\y •' •
,....•··
•
·•!,
• ' • :•••
. ,
• ' • :, •• • •
.
, , ,. . ·.,.. ,·
-:. .
.. , '•i,r
...• .,. 1,l·
. l
• ••
, ··: ':1
l,.••.
?�: :ii! •\ :
' ...
··1 1 r ,·1
.•.=·.;·
•• • I .,,
•• • •
.... '.: •,
-� •::J'.:
.:t '?'� ,· :·.:..r
·: ..
. . .' .
109
.\
:-'
.\ ·: .. •,
.•w- • 1.1,; Acc1h;cd

• • ·.CcHr11.),rn'y· rn .the: slrnp,: :o :t,oc>ldt:l. Gopy• or .Lh�·
'
• -.-'.1l··
••
t\'({l'Ct:m�nl. !k, ·�11:h1!dul1: A d�Hr:d ·l 2 1 h· April �00� i� afmi;x.9tj li'er�j

• I
ANNEXOR� 11.B''.
·
. . . ::. . . · . . , : .:f
. , ·,. 4·
. 9.''l'hal. b¢<:�wsc ,,I.hr. {:om.1;h,1inanl wanl(:cl 1.0° a �:ii d1e -r��iliti��· (,)f ·1� ... f6� ..
for:.
(·'
j-1i. t ,·, Purnh.a&ing }lnd irivcs\in 11 in lhc �l\id· proJ"<i<:l: <>1 I.he A�cused Ccimnany.�A
0
.� � , • • . I<' • I •
I .
-ni ....
.
I.be. �lli� pU'rpo_sc. <>f · Imm lht: Accusud: 'ompany J . its.: director;�·
I ••
f
rcprr.sc��a.Li�Cl!-\ assurcd_'.t}'H: .1:on1-plainan1 .. w :P.' <WiQe.' prnper' assistapc�;.a �i ..
.
I
0
with the Mppf'nv<:d sunclf<in 'plun�.o_r lh <! said �ojec:L which s}1_alf be pi:-o"·: ;d .
h;t .t.he Ac:1:1.1::rnd Com puny for rl1<:lliLullng the : lc>ali dl,!!bUrsal · '.to •.
· •· · e.. ··
.... .·
s:orriplalpni1L, Th at. i1. 'ii; pc:rLl'nnn.t LC> ·mcntlc>n °cri:,t.h'itt till i:Iate�lhe! t-;c� · �¢.' ·.,
0
Cnmpuny, ill-l dlr.�i<:Lc>'r�.ll!'ld l'<:prnstmlallvr.s t\u Cl squarely fail'eo to S'Up.pf) · ·n.e.

. r<iguislL� dctl:i.m1cn·H:01i1�Jfni11•g thr:t�� _ld, · ., • •,
· .. ·'. •;prQj(:Cl l!S c<>1:1mi.lL\:d Q�'Lh,�· �rC•.IS�d Comp� Y tC) t�c: cqmpli;lnal\t,tlo. It�• J
.. lhc f1-1c,t4 q1at I.I�� t:nmpl�.hH1T)l rqguc�tc� ,lhe ' :cu�co �crsons for 'tpe & · J(...•
but dud. lo which tnc c<tnipla.in1:1.nL could not vail the·· loan :!'a.cllify .frofu tie •. . .-: ·
. .
bani< ic�ding Le> hards:hlp'&,:ml:rnry tc{�ht1 1 cpm lairfonr �n· thls:a.ccouriti. ... ,:
0
'
•
I l I ■ I • •
> 0 t • 0
■ t '"•' ! • .-
■ :
• I I • • I : f,f
• • • i '0
10. 'fh�ll ln th<: said �grt:qmcnt, 'tnc .Ac<!us c1: Climpany hac;l ·Intogr.a� · � :
Claus<: i.e. ·cla\l&e 2(gl or Lhr. said agrccf,l:\C \ i� reipe-ct of Pref�te fat .
·�i ··
1
. . LocaLi<>� .C�ur�cs 1: �hich· \!,'U.s s·p_c�i!lcally. ()Jlli t_ed. ii� the. s�id' -�gre��eti ·
mc:nr.i<ln.iriJt N.A !Nol _Appllcal)lr.J ,in 'rt:spr.c:1. < bh<: shop/.spa'C.e pl,Jr9}}_ �q. · r
_hy/r.<!$<:!�Vod for lhc,1:cm:1-ph�i11�·r.1L, · .
· · ' : j; ' ·;: ·
.. 11 ... 1'lh11. _ii. ��.pc:rtinf:nl.·LO ,iTH:nlicm h<:�<:: �hat i� t�c_'ll�ht o(a' �j ..
m1:nlioi,�d rtwts,.' no Pr6r�rc:otlul Lc,ca.q<>n _qh rges, were: applicabl�1::t�·: . { •·: · •.
· complain-ant whith was,1,ihc:rwhie 1.0 be.paid. 'n �ddition to tho !;Jasic':S. ·.-�· ·:•'
P"rir.c ro°i 'whii:h lhc- comtplui.�unt ��recd L<; cnt }r i.nLO th; ?aid agre�me� ": ,., i.
0
pc� -�cn:c;'-dulc: C>f Lhc· Agrc:c:rncr.ll, b'Ul, Lh(� clCC . ncd 'J)i:rs()n,s ?,re ve�l�'n( n !
'dt :: .•
> :"_
pror.cssihi1�1f ."a1Hj uiwd . l(J cht:adng ·1.tic: bc�n· fide '-buyers. ·1r-i the .riOOf:
. . r.h,1rging.'.Hl<!°�ar Prnf<:rc!'nt.1111 l,ocrHi<>n qhll.r�,is._ · : : .· • . ·. · ·� \:. •ti :
•
O O • 4 • : t • ■ .. o
,t
it . ; . . · ; .
TS·lL ·sin(;(::bc glnning' -ll.fler
• ■ ••• ••
}4, . mu}<(ng' Lhq irst..pa.yme�t ,to'.the �¢� . '.� . . .

0
. �onip�111 :'�n -�ht

r�,1�c '!l�·surl.ln?e� �Jf. (hf _c!fG�ISC No: 2 to_ gij.f;��c: co$pl�t
a�pro�c}i�9 .;he A_c�us<;d ?I>mpa_ny a1,d: to .·.l c ot\,er- El:??��d. pc:��-·!
_ · numberl>f tunes w1lh ,the requc�st. to ·pmv1g the plan�:;:t��rqved,Jtl9t � ..� . •>
I
�i • ·.": 1•
·rar.\1\iy: :�r
conccl!rie:cl a4ll:rnriti,:s, upoi:'· which the:" coJ)'lp ui��t·,.co.i��ji¥aif-�ij�� · -� ... .'·
Lht:· b�-��li roe .t�c P:�fp()SC or gc1;li� �in.al'lc.e f�c'tlltY, to
1�1:r drr.p!,1, .:-hop 111_ Lhc� �u,d Pn>Jc.c� or Ac<:�sud. Of!lpany. . : ..3.._.;,r,.. i � ....
.B�*1 ·.�
I
: �
. ..
.\ . : . ..:-
'
...ff"•l''I,
� ',,.� .:� \ . .,
.,_•:,: •1 •,
•• I • I ••.. ' •
• , '. • .' •
I
' �:•�,-.:,, • ••dt•�••• : f I •
·.r:·.
' •'Ir.:,,''•• l
1
. .
. . ..
I"'• ') ·' •, • ••• • � • ••
··.·
,,
I • : • •�••i.�•,'i. •
• : •• • ••'-: ••·• ...J •• • •• .1f)•i
• 1 •• ,
•
•
.' • '. • • • 1,� .. •.. J ..�·
•. •• • '.. ' ' •,' J i: , l,
J' .. ,.. \
:-:-./?/ . > :f;.),t

• • • ,.,1. ��· • • . •• • ·..
• I••,•, : ...,1 \1- •
• • ·
••• f· J· . i (:_::•:·:··· •.
..
. ..
I • 11
.....
. ..
. \ni��Y-
. ..
...
t 110
I.
·,·
·
m ·:· .(D. ... ,
I
.
.
•I
.
; fi �
• . .. .
:.c..�t'r .. r-l-�-:.·. . .
' r
·
.: .' •.
.
•
·---:· ...1 I •• •
•.. •
.
• • • •
•
• • • • I
f:o1, .
• I
■• •• ■ • '•
l: . rhal 1.hc: r.ornpltit.nl;I.J'.ll. had giv<m lhti. p1yments of in"slallm��-

L:i,c w· .limc:as· nnd \uh�:n -(:HI hid by Lhc /\CC,U, (!Q Company_, \�$ diree��rJi : 1\�f · ,.
1
\4, ��-l ii. il'i f�1rtliqr sub�ilCOd Lh,i�_l,h<l Acl \.\�Co,� ?rnpany �aQ.�s, · e�'.,��·.. ·\·
.
rcct:i�,l�· · and f,lcknowtcdgm!11:nl agi;l,in1>�: t 1:. i,;a1d payment:,; 11 y:. i ��•:_.,
. -<�omp\a\p�nl, �1.Js•pr..i:Ltn<:n\ u,, m<mtion t-i �n: that t�.e ac�u�:c�-- pers�il?=;�·�t::;
_
l'CCdved/ �n l�m<mnl of Rs. I�.�� ,&90/: (R�JP� !8 f•'m.1rtc�!n, L.ucs thi�u :-�� \ii
1'hot:1surio t•:lgbL �'11.mdr1:if_ �.nci Pifly Only.} f1 <>rn )h<� comp��inant: rio )� :.
_
r.xr.(:\.11.l th'c iJh(l�(: �1:n)fo.�(Jd. aw<it:mun!, I �NEXt[RE•Bl, -_by sp1
f
)lf. ·t�?
n:i.<lnlioning t.hc Shop No, A• l25, thcrefon:, ,the ·carter the s�id a_gre�� nt . as· ; . . • , ·_;
.
e>:C<:\,ll11d ..in ri:sP.ccl or 1:1�ld 11,hbp, · whiqh .as uri)ltr�rily· 9han� l tid', . .' o :.
inli'mfJ �ecl lo lht: c:c!mpl�inanl-in the year 2�}0<.. as r:icmti9nc;d i� th'c r_.no. rng ·'.• ;
. · • ..•'
. i1ami,; .. · · , : . I
... .
. I·
• • • ' ' •• :
• • • ,I
· 1 fi. . Thal iL ii. p1:rli,n1:nt lff mention :hur;i l�� L vidc 1�t�t:r·21,)�h· j41y: 2-�Q:7, thi · � .
�
.
.. ' Ac:t;��w.ci Ctni,pf,ll"IJ' h,i� t;pc:r.lfi<:ally. dciinan°d(�, (h<;• P,}l/�crtt' ;elatit\�:1 tB. aft. ·. · · . :·
;
1:on:-1.ruction frcim lnc:• c1m,pluinanl, 01, ()nt! :hm, ·9 whic:h mea,ns 'that tU. pi l.)�.
\...,. lu.1vc ht:qri � pprovcd I lCl ll_rn Acc1,rnccl <;_ornpc>.n. , by :Che �onc�-rrr�d
• '• • .. 0
_
• I,
orq_�� ... •
1•·• • •••
a�r
b!Jl on Jh1: <>l),cr ha!"d thi: At;c:uscQ; Company kcpl th<: co�;f?l�1��pt; n d. � : . •· :,
.. in. rclfl.�lt)l) lo the appmvu� plans �() Lhat; lo n ,C C)\.\l9 be f��ilita��-9 �t · n� .. · · · .
bch<:ia· o[ Lhc: �:ornplujQ�T.ll from lh<:. h�nl<i.fi'n ·n.cial 1n:-1titl,tipn, .Cgp· . o(: �lls:° ·
· ·
·.'
· lt1llc:r diiloci 20 111 ,Jl.lly;:,2091:1'i annexed hon:tn , lc>.rig-w,ilh. th� �◊ m�lt�\1 �tt.� �:� · . · . ·
. . :
- .··. lh<: ind c � s a l .<if th�� :1'1t b.le
� : �� ·- � :, __ _ �� ;
_
cour t us
_
�NN �U�� - ·
�•. • : • · . :.
.. .
! , . -�} . · ·. ·.. _·. 1
\ ti. . . . 'rn�I. p1.1rs.�a!'1. tq · _lh<: exc:cutlon of he .Agp�em;e\n :tli�: ! �Y. -�� ...... · - _. i
(�OITIJj!ll'\Y failcid 0 l<l. provid�:· t�c· ap�rovc<;l. isa: · Ct\()n · p\'a,'!1·. anO: du_c I 9 ·6,�
. .
. av:.iilflbili�y" or Lh <l ap.pl't)VCd s.unt:tfon p.lans () lntl: p'rojcct, the· C<>mJ ain' �t
_
1:01Ald �Jj.t .V.:�l./ uvail lhc:, lm�n/. nmindc. fa'c:i ity "from ·.t��-- 'b.a11k. O .' ot �·.v'i: .
..·' rinal}cia.lim;lil1.1li1in, I\. is ahm w.orlh mc:p-\io1i. c:rc lhat the complain�_(vi�c ..
-lc:�Lt:r d'9t(:'� 3�11 • N�Ml�bcir r 2008.' r<!qucmlcd Ll\ •. Accu�ed, ?�m.P.any :t?t�J��,d... ·
1:hc:.um.Q\tnt paid to. 11 for �0<1 kmg' of cio��cr �1ar s�ace 1�}�e SEua; ,
_ _
·li�l.i�I;�•
_Copy ot , lhc 1<:ll.C:r. dal�ld 03·. l l ,2008 1.s ani _meed hero,m,,�on.i w �P!• , �-.
1:ornplajt\�n\. foft.hc: kind pl!rusat.or. this Hon'�I: Court.as �,i>�U t.>H, 'f.'..�.'
.·'.�I;. : ·. · .... �
■ I f
■
. . . ■I
'
..,_ ,,, ···••"t (,.•� ... . .. . I I
t' .,.,·
\7. · ihtil. trwrc·�a8 11 ,;o_mpMe :-;ilcnc:b_-on l�<t parl i,r.the ��scd-C
1
i
or �>tncr.accµsc:d pcrim M -�() r!!:,pond lo th<: . c.om ?li1lnaiq�¥�i�h v�:.!/J�tt)f ·'.
_. _ , .j
. ltm,:r d!:l.�<!Q_ 03. I l."2008, b1:1l L_ne �ccu8c5,I C_o_ pany ·after a:•per1od•J ?,
:�;f4V,� •.
m'lirnhs ,'. inf(?.rtm:d lhc: co":lph,ir.ia_nl 'l.h-n� 1gh . <mr res <, 1>dcncc '!l '. �;if;� ." ...
\.,
_ p .
:\0,93.�9�9, )hal lhc <:CH'll\lrur.ti,Qii or lhc �l bov) f.c)ia p'rnject i� in full �sy{og
. _ • . • i ,•• ': • ,
'·,1·
... . ... : . P.l
i
-::r : :
.'
' I'
' I· 1'
.
._ ·., .,. .
1 •"r.. t •: •
...
•• 1 1
• ••
. ' /
•
·_.·. • , : ._........
• I
. * .:_. .\; ·�,.. - ..

• I •
··i.h ,'•r,ii -:··'

·' ;J' :. ·: . . .
• ' 'I, :: ' . ... • :\ �•;
•• !. • ••• ,.t •• ;;��-
.. ·--iw_.!-1 '.!;;t.j
,.
... ·
. �: ·.. �-:-�:·i'!:·\.ti·
. 0 o O
:
I •
.. ,, 0 o
. ..
f:+.. , . . . .........,.
....
·: . - 111
. ·. f�rr·:.... . P'..�-· �
. ·." .
. ·....:: .,. � ':"'. -:.,. . . l
.,. . . . .. . . . .. . . .. .'• .l ... · ': ''.i�. .
�•Jf, ..:: . .
_.111.� :t��.. sa_m,: i� likely- to b� c:o�plclcd ·�in� Jl furthe!' infoTmed- \�?:('.I�� .

••• ' .. • It .:
',. •
..
:
c'(nltlrll.�lio·n nf 3r�1 nms1: 6'f the sui<;i, prnjccL h, fA pr,ogr�s:; and tlie;" 9c��;-4l ·.: \
r//' I -�·,' ' ••
. ...
. . · Compa�w fyrlh<:r. in ror.mo( the coni;p·lainant _-thi� lhc' afca.' res er � ��

,•
f?ir:jBf.. ..
complal��ni i,1 A-125. �n. Oroµn4 Ploor '>.!as:a.\l�.l-tcd to �h.c cornpla1 'l��:<>�:;l: ·· , . :_
. \
.. pro�i�1�p.�I bai.i� a.nd �u��]Ctil lo c��ng<·: OL lhc limed( n,cc ':-..-s�11 �PP . ��l�}�rL.l; .'
d1.1r111g �!: (!Ollri;i:•:l?f cnn�lr1,,1�ll!>n •IL Wfl!-i, rurt-h<:,r c;o�vc�ycd to Ch� .com }�tti,��t. in , ' ' I
'•
lhat n<.i�! .the bu1ldin& plans ·have been ap_prnved; by 00� p.nQ.41l:_:'19�l\:i
ai:11.horittcs ·,:_h�:rgrcm.l lh<! ric:w number �C-lll.!t:Vr.d ror �he comp\ain,arit�·lv:4'�:�}.?IJ; ':. . . '. l
167 ori ·upper· iobby Leve!: mc;as1.1ring 'upproximafoly ,260 Sq. ·F'\, df S�p.�:r
Ar11i{ <in-the �,ltl'L .No. 13 _A in�L:-ir� or.�pac:<: no, �-12� measuring i:i,.ppi�>x: s�·�: · · l
Sq. l�t.. of Sun.�r Arc:c1 on Plot.m,. :13·l1, Copy of_th¢ lt:ltcr o�ted 30:03 009 is
.
u-rint:xcd· h(:r.oih ulqng_ ).Vtlh tht: 1:on1pla.ina!)l' ·for lQc'·kind pe'r'usalf<)f thi&:· ·: : ·.
· ·· · ·.' . . \
Hon 1 blr. 'GuurL ,rs ANN�XiJRE•'S,'· . ·
·
18. . T�;� il was:r:) � lhc ri�;i ·�lm.c wh.oi, th� -A�;�se� Com'pa�;-�as ··; ri-f�rJ��:· · � : \
Lhc comphlit'la!, L ?�mJVlh� �u.pcllon/ui;,pi:ov,al or·coru;��u�cion. plans, bf t?,�. ·. : : . · .
_ I
con[m(n�d. 1,1..1Lhor1ty, ll 1:. 'l\�al�d Lhul. the ·Ac�u�cd Co�p9iny. k�pt· 1 ct�.
cm'l'lph\\n·�11t In dur� or' rnis�cprnscntt:d. l�c· <!omplain_a.nt tU\' ��e F<?felpt; •9:f · A
lt:lt<:r dutctJ 30•li M�rc:h 2009 , b y th<: .
compla1il.m1L. · · . • . . • :. W,
. \. .
. . th•.
19. �-.��L. u1�o� · n:.c<li pl o� \n� :i;u_id �1Hr�� ·d,\ted
<:omphn��ml tir,prmH:hcd l�� Ar.cu�c:d Company, ·und to. the. above l�.amJ!:� ·
i�
·
M•i�c� ;o�_?..":.i�f{i ,. \
. accustid '•):)crirn1is, whu arcJWt\rC dir�:c:tor/l? and orficials of the Bil¢c(i-s€d
t:m'l:)p�iny f()r clarificuti<>n �if icrms in resp<;<:l br lhc said -�o·i;ice .trlerttw( . I
A,·cusc,{: C.om11a1,y' iLS dirccu,rs, rcpn!S(!l'll�Livcs and =om�ials 'insi·s�tfihe ; .:• . .\
!
@mplal\1 �i1t to �u:r.�:11} th<: terms"· un,:ond i�i:<mall�� !111.m �io�et;I' _·in' t�e.
. ·#�� .. .
J<:llcr or Lh<: At�<:uf><:d Bmnpuny. It is furtht:r pcrlineht .lt, :mention h�r;c: ,��•} .. ·. ·
. wilht�ul.�1ny c>pticm in liond t he complainant,.hu� to t).ccepf,the �ai�-��Vffl�V1lf. ..
oi.
j i_i,,'� _ ,:
t�e �CF\'�<:d �01:'pun� i�:. the t:omplaim1nl h!,td m�este� ��·fl-,1:�..her./��!�
· 11r<: tu'l'l,t.�avlrtg 1>f, l.ht:1�· hti rd 1:urnc:d-mpncy. ·. . ··
.. �: i'. ·:'l :. };,,:
. .. . .. : . ,. . : . . . ·,, .. ·. ;•:: , "r.��
20. · •rnaJ; th1:rcmfl<:r us ·dt.!oircd and ·dlrcntcd by thp AccuG.ech Comp; .. , ., -1'1?/' ••
r
dirt:t>ltirs\: r1:pn:.$t:nUHiy<:s and orfic:hl 1�1 the ct,mpla.inant ha:d t9 scnf� 1;\!}tt�-c ·, ., .' '· ·
• • I • I ' I I •ji:t'
,. •'
dated ·Q�'! 1• • April .2009 to lhe •Accused c11mpany: mentl�>'.ltp.i. a�o. t:;�p.t ,·, . •· .
. •. i
. ·. t'ncuti_nft }cl� wJlh com,1�a.nY, �frjcltlls und \lie ·dclail.s. A_b�;i;i.t_)he .c.1 }��fi�. ·....· .; · . ·.'
paym1ir:1t· plf1.n which hhwi:vc:'t' was uguln Mver uckr.'l()wledgQ\:l;:b..y- the·:� O�$:� . · · . ·.
·> �omp�{nr; �opy or. t�<: le.�(<;_r:do,Led ()7,04.2009. I� �nnexed :hif�tn a.lo� t.�W¼j�)·· . '. . $
.
. ,lhc C<1,i:np.\\l'ln�hl , for \:ht� km� 1pornsu.\ or Lhl.s l·lon'blr. �Ol.)_rt·a.i;:·�,�·E'%1'rf,i!�:. . :. ,·., , 'llf!!I
21. 'fha�t on n�1m�t:r --��r: ·pnnmn_uf mhillings �i:�·. verb�l:.' ;r-e��{ff�/fot .
� ' o • • •
t I •' ' t ;}.1
•• O 1 • • t •
·,.
: . · ·-: · .: � filr�1�i:
.
, ::fa · :-.. . ,:•r,
:·;•i��*'.��t;;,,"glh'-#\,��r;,["uf.. ·:
.: . ''
· . ·· · · · ··
,,rt �:
}t,}J 'lt:.. . •
." I'
/i�·:trt;��
.i·••
I'
112
I I I •
'
.'
1.
I
. .,
I. I .
It
'--
. -
.
. .
.
.... '•
.
'·· 1
' .
I
!·
I
i. . '
•• I
.. . :
.... · ::-.
l--
'
-�·
i·
'.. t.i.-t,:,'
I·
'iI .. �
l
t·
:115 \
I .
. . ' . 1: ....
.. '
,' ..
I ,
.
113
·.· ·
<· ::.ij'.::·,.::.}l ·)
;,, . ,.. . .. . :;1, f.) . �
. . . . _. .. ·. . ·t · \lt-<:. -·
· ...• ;ii . ..
. ·· . : · ·: ..
-.
.
,
.b..:.�r.mvr.yancffer <ff·go�se�.s�ai:-\r.i·: ·

ci�;; favour·: . ·: · ·
: ,.. ·-.' :_,::. : . .
· t:. -Pcl:,'!i·H:nj. S_ch<�dulm: . J.:·.·_:-:�\-':

. :-'.: :;:::1 •
1. • Rs'10ldkhs�2S .O.'S.2009 ·.·. . : • .-:•,
2·s 0 "Do· 9 · 1 • · •••• ·i • ·' ... ..
. ii. Rs OS l�1\/1l$'-; · , , 9·"'.
• ·• 1•·!.
: ..'-\.�:,...
iii. · Rs 0.5 lqk�s ,... 2,5, 12, 200{? . : . .. •:• ·
iu:·RsDS/qk'hs-2,5,02:2010 : ·.\ '.:)· i:
··
. 11. l?,o; 0,5 !cilchs-- 2,5,l,),i,2010
· ·: . · :i ·:-:;' : :·;··
..,
Ba.la�cc,oa offer· <>f · i;i ,;ssc:ssi911.:.
0 t ••
. : ·
o I • !• ,·• 0
• o o I I
o •':: • t o
, t • • r It I !, :•
d; W{· (�uf.>��a 're;U
•: • • o •. I I
f I
l,Hc:- ,Of!l)'.)·tc> h<l prc:scn(ud only ·wh�n aboyc·<io�c.H�lpp_s 1:1.re· .appr.(!vc4 -by tll.�··
·.cmnpi1i;iy and �<!li.it!d'i,, �rlelng llnd given to us bcr6rc .l Slh,May 20�9,� ............ ;
I • • • • •t ,,
• t
. '�!>PY . �)f .'u,r. : lc:Lt<lr. dHLt;cl \'l ,0·5•,;rno9 II\ 'dnn�x�d·: herein f,\lon� ;�ith. the ....
0
. ·,
\:ornplt1i�� for 1.h<: kind. pt:r�iit1\ of .this J·lon 1t)l<: :C(n:1_rl u:-: �:NNE?Cl)Rl:)•l)·,
· 1· .
" • ' • . .' .• I
.. .. . . . . :· . '· <.':. '. : . -� :·· :, \j: .. ::· . : .. : .

25, 'rha� Umiugh ils lc�t(:'l';dulcd· 11' 11 M�y 2{)()9"t�e :cQm�lah:iant_ r�AUC��-. .
lhc �ci;Q,s9d. pt·::119n-s lo c_rmfirm thH\· th<! Shop Allt>:ttod t� het.l,e.: � ·6 l_ ·o� .... ...
, .
.. . l,o.bb,v li'loc>r �1c1s n1,1JI 'allotmcnl . wl Lh, approved plans· anti.. T-!l!lP�.' clc.a,1�. .
,.
.r' mcmliciriilig th(! Sh()p _lor.}�\iOf\ in ()CCl,is<ld �:ompany.-'s-!inal appr:OYal. plans and'
.
. .
with a. (!l·)l�fir f()titfo n ·lhc! .the: AcCL1Stld Cc>n1pan-y' shali" D<;t· C·h:-angc· the· .i<ication . · .:, ·.' ._., ..
0 °
t 0 .
� i �
. . of lhc: sh op·. It WIHi ru·r1,hc:r "rcquc;l c\ L > th1: Acd.1t,ed: pers�;:\S �o co_n·n��. � a.t ..
0
�
?<>rryey�_:nco· .Dc;c:d sh li. ��: c�c:�u't�i� immc�-ltiCcly_ wi\h. an of{e�· Qf �o.�.R�ssi?�: .:
·111 favout or lhc ·comp.l-s11r.umt. Tli<1: .d<llmlc:d· pay��.:nt �chedule. \_V}ls also.
· :mc:ntionc:d in the· sa1i'9 · li:Li.'<:,r and u :Chc:quc: �as also· en�losed �eji�n-g ·�?-:: .'
.. 158179-'.frir u_n �1n:ounl or Rs: 10.00 \,i1c11 in favour ,�t the-..�ccu�ed G�mp�pt·· :··
... .wilh ,lhiJ. cc>ndi_tim,s m1mlioncd il'I lhti !laid lctlef; 8e_c'?,.�{;1< 1 it .i:pi. · . ' a.�·
.c:cmdiLion,. UP,t>n \tic: a.c:�uscd_:p�r�ims tryal llic actiuii1'ct CO�f;l.nY,-will present
:lht: sald·ch·cquc orily wpcin �ll Lh<! cwnditi\ms mentioned li:i:�f. salQ;l tter.-e;�
�pp.rc>�a�,iri writing by the Acjcuacd Gmnpany, It is pertinel\-'l;'.°to ment!.-11,hQ::r#· . ··. · ·
th.i1t- th�\ c;cmdlLions ·or Lhc co�p�ai.n�h l. wcrn' autom�.ti:a.!)Y:)-i:-p;ovc:d �Q�·':°5�p. . ....
cl(:cusf:�r'pcr!lOt)S �l the ·very 'l7l0f'!1qhl' whun �he) Accused c:qrl.'tpanx Pl\·�C.\\�$t?
· 1.hc": iwi�:..E�hcq�i: f<lf cmcaimrricnt ih le mis<>� lnc sai9 l,ct��r, · · .. · . J:,� . t •.
26. ·1;h�l vMc:. lcllcr dated .18 11'. Muy 2ll09, the .�cc1;1sed G�twipany· i�f.Qr.-ffif<.P. · ..
.
..,: · · · U1c:· c;<>f!i:P_lai��nH · lhal lht: �r::-�S<;.d ��'mptiny· ·\�(ormed the :c�mplaln.i�� t
th<: Ac:Cc:\:i�cd Co_mpany has prov1slonally r_c!icrvcd Space No,· A-�l. · .: �-,j�.S,.�J:
lc:vcl . m. i � g q p
:surln 395 ·S . r•'l, pf ·Su er A_r<m·. on lhti . p :��
lot· .�: 13
· . • · ·.,ij��l-.
..,, . .' · · .,1J.�.i:1a,
I· · ·�=;•: ·. =r:-a·b:i·J 1tt1 :·.
.' . ··�tmffi,-�1.;·
•' ..:.•
, .. ;_�·f ·)�� •
, • •ti •• • ,..• '
' I ,•• t
•• ••• •• • :.-•
I
1
.. •� •
•
,•
'
t "- i... , •� 'I•/
•
·
1..
.· . . . · .Jh ;· .;?,a•e
't.' • •• ·,:.-"• �·
0 • I • •·•·,• .. •'• ,.
.. 0: I
•.
•,.
1.
1"1.i,
J. ,. __,_
..
..
;
.
·� . . \ ... '
I ' 11 ' 114
- ,
- . \"·-.1c<,. .
. I·
I,
. ♦ • =.·. . . . •
. ... .
'
' '
;
. ..
•. :.
30.
, ..
., ...
-·.
.
.
. . :..
,...
1:11:11�· ....... �-�-----..........
, _____ ........,....__ ... .,.:. --�
115
. I .
.·. : . ·' •·.r�:�}

''. . r,-�r%·�1 ·
.. � ..
. . ·•�l-,.).r'
t • :.r f • • •
, .... • •• •·,
. · l.;. . . r,,. • ...
·.,
. :., • , . :
�i 1 inpla_it1a_n1. h�IO no opLion in hand and h�f.d lo wri�c ii l��ter p�te� O,!,li f��rt . i :
:f<)o<r .m lh<: Accui::<�d · Company arid ii1 :J:hr. said \ctler ��e. com��}�f��-, 1 •
• -
I • c:onlir�cd c111d inform<:cl th(: Ac:C:llll(:d pc:r:-.cHlS lhaVthr: Shop no .. A'-6f:9"r\!.th!t :

1,nbby tt:vt:l·mmii-ltrlng 395_ Sq, 1:1.. on.P.l<>tNo', ·13-B h; fin'a1!.Y. all�CL�-�\-_t9\·��·(.'f: ..
compl�inlm� by lh<: . Ac<:1,ii;nd . Compunr, _ ll 'wtlS' iurt��i:::·. 1_1�f<?rme�r�? � \�n·.:..
·uccL11,ad.1:,c�·rscin:-; Lh�L 1.hc: Acm,,1!:1(,!d _Gomp�m.Y. hfi? c�·c_a.shc'd the s�l-�!¢hci,��;�·- ·
for an nnfounl or l�s; ·J0,Q0,()0{>/· (Rup,:cs.-,:c:n l,acs Only)i. enclose� 'by" �ttif:"
t:qmph1joanl �fth th<:: l.cui:r dalt:d \ '\ih May· 2009, i,vilho�t un·y°'obje�t1.�ns 'tt1� : .
in'ipli<id:ly llc:m:pL<:d. ,.h�: wrms. oJ 1.hc lcl(cr,' da�<:d l l 1h M�i, 2909.\ WNoh ,. . '· ·
ll.lnl»,IT1�)1,;lnl I,() l1CC<:puincc (lf the lcrms·or· inc.. payn:cmt scheg\.!le giv.e�.bt- �hq ··
coinpla)nonl lll �h(l'° 'A�CU!H!Q ·company �loi1g wilh other �or.tditlons� of ·th'e, ; , '
sun'!� le:t,tc�.\ Copy <>f thc_Jc't��r da.tc�d 08,06.20Q9 ls annexed here!n �1<,>pg wH°li:
Lhc comph�itil'for .lh<: 1dn.<f por�sal of'this Mon'bl<rCourL
• as ANNE�URE�. · ,. ·,
• •.. o t 4 4
1
I O
• ! .. t I 1 1 '
,Jur;i-,: 2009, I.ht:. c<>rill)la.ina..�1:: a.is.O• l��cmt�ij,,: , .. ·::

4 • • ••
3\. · . 1'hat vid�-lc:ll<!.r -c:hilc:d 8 11�

0
.... lhc u<:c:usc.:d p<:r�ons tn·i1_t. :there! h�!i ·q�wh·,som'c c.:rror)n �a.l'cl;ljation:at. �� .t:��: -:.
or th,: .acc:us,:d compclijy ·ln rcspC!Cl or th<:. Rggrcga.te ,price o'f.·�he spacd In ., . t\lp .
�a!� pr1>jc1:l o,r thd J\(l(!US(ld Company 'rhc .c:onip;lui nan\ rui::�9r .i��ormeq· t : tp'� .. .
ac:r.usc:d p<lrllC>rlS lhat lhc L<lrms &, c:ondi1.1ons or lhe orlgina:I. Shop eu1cr, s,•, 1
.
Agrc:cmc_n.1.:·�)C�C:r changed Whilci ()(fr.ring �he nr..w Shop,-Sp.a-ce th�-·-' 10:
�.Y
rnmplafmrn't, as ·confi�hw�. 'thti Ac:c:ul\1:q Company in �ts let�er· ,;lat�d 8th ·i
May, 10()9, cine� Lh<:rcfiirc 1 L�jec.t:'4i
pc:r I.he .terins· or Lhc $1:ic>p ,8'-!yC'ri- Agrt;1:mmi1. ii\ ·RI\, 2'l, 125/• ·(�'YRee� fwetjiY.' · .
1r,,_ur 'l'?ci.µsutid,:On<� l·handrc:d 'und Tw?nly:ti�<: <>nly)• per sq. ft. l�)s ·t\1�� ·. ,
�lfJ wd �h�l the Sh!lp .r,g,: A·61 on Lobby Lr.vr.l· IS th� urea ()f .39'5 �q. c� . .wfl!Jt_ . · ..
�1:r t.h�::<\�lculatlori of thtt �·aid _s pp.cc, ru'te ·nxg�-undc� th_e a�fctJ?e��;re.f,9,T,� ·.
, Rs .. 95!2:;375/ · .(R�P,�'.rn Ni_nc:y• Fiv_c:. �:-a�:s·:'!'�clity Ni�e 'Phouaa�9 :��e-¢_ • ·
H�indrr.f;.tnd SCV(!nl.Y li'IVC! 01:1ly} . ·• . • , ·- .·•
1
. -�ri:�;:.i- � .
'
' .: , ' � ·· · ' "\it •1r.r• • •
. · ::32,. . . ;r.)��1.' al! pc:r the lcllcr dated'· I g,,�:· Muy 20QCJ, thcl Aq��sed-.�Affpj� : '. .
, intt:nliii�_�lly_ 'wii:h ·l;) u!ufldo. !ntcnljo�� 1:alt:p_lu_L<·:d. �i;. l:i.>�, l�.86�/ � . ;(�P.f:�i _: :. :
· ·. •:int t.rw� _F'i�c -1.uci; Si�l��n:_1'_h�)Uliah.�. l�ig�}/lu�drc:d a.1'14,'.�-l�ty. F!��\S�l�l :
in!HCfJ'�,.<�f Rs. 95-, 29 ,·3!;,/.._(��p�es Nm<;ly �iv.<·: _Lacs T.wc;n·ty:�_me?��g
.. '.fhr,cc: �-l��drcd �rnd S�'.ttmty f•'1vc On)y}, fm• �g?rcg�le Ba_sl_c_ �le_.Pr.19R,·f:��JW: ...
·. arc�\ _or��:;��-- f_t ,_ o.f Shop �o. A•q t, allc>Ll�!d_ I.<>. th� compla_�nal)'t. · ·. : :.:\· :.1;(t· .. ·.
�i�·.
• I ♦ • ♦ • ,... •' ■
r
a
0
��- _·: T��l _in: 1·1:ply Lo."lhc:..11�Hlcc d� U:d 08 1!, ,iun�_zop9 .of c��m�r�f�; . '
·.3 ·: ·. . 9
1
.. --1.h�: uc:i��s:c:.d pur:�oli:; 11sucd u tcmor da.u:d, 7! 11 ,,lt.:ilt,·'2��9 t.<>-��e .co1Yipi :iSJ.,
wh1:rc:)�:"t.h1: uc:cui;cd p,er{;on� h·iw•<: al��gcd tQI• lh� (ac:�s c<>.ri•tr�ry-·tQ 'fl �i1tt ·
actuall'•f:"(ran· splrnd ln-rc:vlJt: uf!d wuii 1tirc�r1'ri<!d _1.0 .lhc. uc��se9,--pett��
t
••·�•i!i:-f•l . •:t .• �t\bf . : . •;., :-
' I.. •
• •
• •· • , . . . ' • •• . •
. .
• • .·, • :"
r, �g·:.•
, • ,�;' • 1,• f , ,
�:8 .
•J' .n
.. _... . . . . : ·-\�}w�· r•r,.

■ t :-. '
■ •
-'"i"11•' -:·..
,-ir. i .:1••;r .. .
I
.• • • ,1·
. .
.
. . . •
'•
: .. '.::. � ::��,-�111..,11 .•,
l• ·J .••. � ..
•:
• •1
.. ;,.r�'
..•', H • �,C 1,q '1 • '
,••. •
• •,• • ' :• .: • ..�;. i}.P';• • ..
• I
.' . . .- ...
•'' .. ..
,,
'
' ..
...
I
I :
I • •
1I
116 ------
•1Llh:J::::et!;L- . '· . --•-•· ,
I
11••� 6d"':'!:1UIWlt.l.w
I•
··· ....
---'···· I I I •
.. . . .
\� .:
-:: :..
..
. ; . : � �: ·. :;�,: .
...
.. /, .. •·�·
·r 1 -;;r,.1.4 xr :·
.
I' .,..,:\� Q' ,;i'-,. : ,'

.. . t:=-
:. .. . · . t::. . ; _.. J ... :. •,.
• • '# �- :: ::· ·:;.
,J(i,�c: 2009., In their l_e.tte� 1-ais??:I,�n .'-�.:

I ..
i- C()n1pla1nan·L.l(icfc her- l(:U<:r dal(ld 08
·,J��ly, 2-0()� 1.0· lht: c:ompln.ir:rn:nl Ll:ic .i<:c:ui;cid· pt:rsons wron_gly.°_<t<�·n��-nd/:� '.�q�.
111
1H!
1.hc coTpl�.,inant hu�l ,�gnwd l<> ·pay . Prcfcrnncc t..c,catiori. O.hf.-r,.�cs:.: (� . . . . .

.
dmmindod by'1.h1: ,Accy�iid Cqmpany. IL is pm'lincnl lo ·mcn�lon. he r(}'tb�� Q'!\lri· · ··. ·•
,,,-\
·wi�h �ht!r->U:ntion W c:��loil lh_<l c:omplij.i�•l'�L· 1.hi; �1ccus¢� ��n10M'J\.!��1�·L·

allc:gcd:hH.Jl �he �<>mplal:nunt..had 11gr<:acl Lo pay Rs,:1105,16,$75/.�.,R\.lfl')c,,e�.•�:
O,nt: Cri1r-c. F'ivc:· \.;'UCS·:St'<lccn '\'h<)Usand· Eighl:H\,ind.r�d and,, S�ve��f'j?,�$f .::. 1·
. .__ Only) tei . th<: Accused· Compij.n�• and · lhq.� �'!-mt! includ,es . th�·. Prcif�r.ef)e� ·:
l,ocaticm Ch�r�c:)I in tiddWpn to Lhr. ·Ba�i<: S�l<: .fJri.c1:, I� is f\irther submit�� ..
ar:rl pcrLt�c:1�,, to -l)'l(!llliM· hc:r(: lluiL frc,m· Lh<: dale: o(''tnt<;rin1£ i�t� 'i:he .
,\grc:c:mc:n-t, 1 h,: l.<:rm or l�alifo Sal<: Prier. ,ind the ·Pre fore nee 1,,ocation .Ch�rgei;, ···
un-�lc:.r the agn':(!lil(:�L W(:r(:· :;pcciric:cilly tmd si:pclrat�ly dsifiryc:d in' ·une�uive�a! ....
1.1:rmii. ll '.is. rnh1:ralCd Lhu.L. th<1 clf.l.u11c or &i,..id Preference ·Loca.tloi:i· Charge-s
W,fll- never �ppliceble 1,JpQI� lhe' (:O)npla.inanL>IL it; fl.lrth�t':S'J�mi,tt�d �hanm ..
.
• • I
:tht: letter' .dijl<ld 07 111 duly i009, lh<; flCCL\SCd p.ersom;. nev�f whisp��ed .�-�
• • • •
,.•
'I.
impc>sttiqn _of ,Lhc. saiq- Pr.efcrc;n_9e li>catfpn . ChargiG, . in·, 1:�e:·oi:i:ne· 1of ..
ccpnpl�i��nL._. Co�y or l�:C let1.r.r 9att:d 07.0�.2Q09 1�·-�,�n��--�·er�in_ai'on.g
wjLh the �<lmplainl
. . ror. ..Lhl:,l<ibd P,<.1rw'1l .or thi:-. Hon\ble·oourt as. ANNE�U-
, RE·
K.. . •:• . . I •.
.. . :
·34,
. . .. .. ..
1'tiaL at the: c,nd·()f:lh<: lelL�f daL�d 07.,91.200�, the ��Qus�d . :' ec,· :�.. , . :Y'!•· •.
,�9,
. lhrc',\lc��JJ _'Lh(: �:ompl�il!lUflL, in c:xprcs� wcm;l,s, l'o pay R'si• :l l.;9_�;6�1�ft . •. · .
·(Rupcm; elc.vcn ·Lac,:s f!li��l)':.F,ivcl ihpuaond •six Hvndred •and .Elght'Y\'�lgfii ·
• I
. : . ,·•..!)nly) .iip�c:dl�l l.q_l� . �nd: }1.:J.rJbcr lhr<:aLOnt)�. �ht 'qomplainknt_ ta 'fi�,i . i
. }�i� .
u_nplc:a�11r,)lno.ss, in.qasc$1cir ��hpaymcmL of Rs \ l ,9.5,68�/· (�UP.�e;\;.'sf\��-�J'l.
· "Ln�s .N_fiitJty mvcI .'.'h_ous�r.d 'Six· Hund roe! and i:;il{�l�:. E;ign�. Onl�J:�f�S;{�n� . ...
· ··. · - . · ·· : . , •.. · · · . · · · .)'.-:,�· ..a
:. I
•••• I
Ac<.'1.rnccl, Cnmp"ny.
:\5·.' Th�l lh<; cc;mpl�in��l·. vi�·c:• lc�t<�r a,l·��d. 19.1� �o�e��e,·.;�09�:��;iii�t _' : .'.
i-1:i1l a. dc�aih:d lc:tu:r (!U1;11 n6tit:tl 'tp the A1:c'�S()d C<>mpa.ny,;J�t'I� sp.e:!l&i�i)lt
: I
_ d�mic:d ��'e. all�g:-i Li_<�ns mtd� by �he At:c:�s·cd · Comp�.�Y, l t ls?•�ubmi·,c�_:•j�Jt · · ·

I hl'<lugh I.he: s�1jd l<:�Lcr �:u[i' not�<:<)' I��> the: Ac:cus<:d Cpmpany, ,th.:t:·com.�f,a_i�.�� .!
r..ill<:<� upon ihc Mc:ust:d) Comi!>;anY U> withd1•;:,w Lheir. lr.tter·.-�•te,d OTM ffµfy · ,
•• i
·,
·. 2009 rurlh_<:r rt:qu,c��ted ,Co lhc ucc(1sud __.pcn.dris •t<> r��jiy. t�.�I¼,��i· · ·. .
�irg ,!
I
.. -_calc�laH�n _or a�si,c Sa.It: :Price vl�fo lhcir:. lcll<ir ,daccd 181h �rJ-?lh 'M�r.-�.i.p.ql. . ·:
and ru\:t��r rc:quc:t'iled to tnu.r'lo ovr.r lnc:• copy' .cif th� appriove'd:',& sa.:nitl�ri� . .,. ..
l/ .l
pla1:1s lh<: spoc:Hicull<>ry pf ll1<: Shcjp . bq�1 rii1g No. ·A·6 i:: �llott�i\p�{,t�f:
�.it�.
<:urn,plainai:i{ �i),d �n ·Lhis_ W,lY, lh_o <:p_mpl��i•�;lh� :'�iclc l�llC:T c�'m �o(��t¥�i�( _I
19,-\ 1-,.200�, r�:1t:enJ1.cd '1;11 hm•, C:(?n_l.(m�w.ns 'a11p: C<ll'nlTl'I.IT)-l'prpon!'3r1·��e·t.mt :: .1
acc1.1�<:� p'.:'.':;c�1.1s. Copy <!f·tl','.: 11:.i'.t�:.r c:_1.1� r'.otic:n 'dal<id · I <..r, \l .2�f- 1 �-::f��!1*�-
• • • •
� . •.. •
: .• � .... ,;1.-:l�g�
• \l'"l�r,.
' I ., . • • .' ... .
1
• ,
i!,p;-..•:.t...l·:�.
..
' • '
J
• • ·., •• • • : • ·-�-:...··;·•.· ..
• I • •
.•
�.dJr:..;.� . ; .
.. · .
• •• t �-•��,. 1•
,; •
i�J
: .
I I•':•
. : ·/· ·. :, �:•�:'JI �i.:.

t :,• ..,. 1t'1•, ...
. 'r.. . ■ '_,: •,�, i,�:�1 �.{ ' � ,• o t ,,

t,• ....
I J
' , • , ••• ;.r.. , , , i 1. t ,
• • ,. .�•• � J• �'" •• I Of f'o Io I ... :",11{ "o f o •
.... '
_.
·�
I
117
• I
37·. · Thul . Lllf . {tj;ll!i. lhc. ,ccfrnpl�iMnl :had:. m�de a payment0 ..of Rs. .:
45,88,°fi�� / · {!�_up��:s ?9rt:( �ive· Lacs Eihrh.ty ·E\ght_ ihousanq.'F'[ve Hu�1d,;e� · :, · .. ' .
and Nln'<:ty Ppur Only) �u<: l<> fabm rcprcsr.ntallons apd wrpng•c6mrriitm·t;:n:t�,;
of the 11�1:ul-\1:d -i,c:riwnii' !'.n li�u·or Lhe suid B,iiic: Price or shop number .i\-1;,·1. -1.t'I ·
the sbid_.projuc:t or lhc: f.ccus11d C<1mpany �hr<>Uf�l:i the· acciJ�e.d petl\C)h�·.,ll: 1�1ii ·
rurthcr � pCrlin<!nl_' ,lo 'm<mllon her(:_ thaL. _th<: �cc\l-�ClQ pc:rs(H\!;°,. 'withc�vt
ccmi;idcifirig its own c:fmdut:t, made !�:. iSpiriion over the .-sta.lus' of -��
compl�irianl by puttin'g 'th() i-mros thal "il -��ppcars 'to• 'th� ACC\1S�9- C�mpa�Y.
thi-.lL the ·cllmpb1lnunt dC>' no�· ·huyc 'the':' suffi<31cnt. m9n·ey tc>. fu.lfill, :rt�
' • • • I • • •
j, (1
c:ontrnct\m.1 \iutiilllics aT).O t�; puy- �<1 lh� Aucuscd Company.''.ll ts·s1,1Qmi.tw.i;t Jij-'
1
lh-1.s rc:g�l'd _lhJtl il is fo.r�lc" ·princlp_al of law (hat:'thmp!iny railed to pei'(orin ·its •qW.i1 · . ·. ·
-
1·c:sp,b11sli,ilill�:s 111,d ha.r�h1y u�la<:kc:d Lhc s�ilr r.espccl a.nd reP,i.itatioi:t -�qhe
r. · •·
r.nmph11trnnl.
' . ,. . .- . ·.. . · · . ·... _' �-;:,.
:\8. -
�ei�nt�- . ;
0
;J�l in- Lh<!. suid r<:pl�•-du_led'251 h::F�brua� 2�:1 0,' lhe �c<!uscd
d emi<:P .'p1c _c·cm�r.ntii'm�. and s�bi'nission c�r Lhti �p�plat�ant· and 1
.
i'-;!��P� : .
dt:mim?,�? L�_c: s�id_ ?l:lh:gcd :,Prefo�cn<:o: l,<lC:�l1�m · Cha.r?o-� fr4�:: \��q -.
<:omplain�nl m ar:' 11lcg�1 ur\d ur,bltrury rt1a11n<!r. I.L 1s furth�r.._s\:.\bm�t%�'",Cf.\a.t.
'
. I.he .ut!(:�scrd 1�1mwns. have Hl<mpc:d. down w , 1.hjs: cc�nduc\· -�'-le tf:�,1�f�� 1 '.:
.. ; ' • �m5>unli •r�ving Qccm . ijlrnu�y .pule! ,by ll�<l� comJ?lamant:- _t�� .:�h� :'.�1#tlf.f0 '
.. . compu��{u�dt:r_J,h � 1,-1�i�:a�r:cem7nl und t1c<:c�ndl)' the A-ccu�e.Q::cpm�ft�f��-,
. rcs�rvc:� 2.ts rights lo f<l·:r.�1i_l' 911 'lls own lcrm� th� h�rd earne_�1onci1J.i�v��J :. �
·. · .··. , hy th<: c.�tnpluim1ril.in ��c l?f<>Jt:c:t of lhc acc:u_scd .company, �l:l��9co�i�J. .\t ... ·
,,'lh;� -
l'cply lci�w1· d::iLcd f5,02.µ010 ls anncxtHi Jrnrm1, along wl�h the.com.-pl, rot; �
• I ., •
• • i..,• .:, •
•. "- · · tht11<.im� pc:r\mil: <>t lhl� �lun'hlc �()IJrl_ ui- ANNEXU�E-r{!·, .· .

•• • • ' • i • l · · · · · :_: :�::�:(
..· ··�,' l;. I
�; ••
\��
. <r·:� .· ·,,,•_:·.t{�{.t��
'• • • :· • \•r
• 1 '•"
tJ1d...
�
. l.,,r:,,o'V:11?.
·ii.. 1
:,·. :,;
..1i':,' i>/,J".
·•-•.:l,(',•.'1'
->. ·.-.: · :� · H:t��. �l · ..
..:;.-:,._·:• •• ;• ... ,J 1 ,;�:: I
·::fi: :�::>1 :•:::J;:')�,�;\?\l�l ·
• , 1 .-� . t:I, i �-:1•,, -
• .-,',��•:•.,,, -� •'!):�j·i1lr
·, '· :·'t. • > f• '1,J 1
.. .;::.. :.• ,.. •, '".:- -� ,,.. : �-li ..
I '
.
··:-
. L
\� :. , --�)r·�
118
. . -�
'I
I
i
\.. . . .. .
i
l
i'
;
. · ·.
.
j.
.,
.i
0.
" i.
'
I•
\"'i.t,·,
. . .
• . t" •
. ..
.,j
·'.: · i
119
. � .> \,�·::;�?,: .
. · · . · · r M� ·:;- ;tl!f · .. \
. \ . . ��'" . ·;......,.Jll
. . .. -:
. . . j. ·":·.��,),>� .. . . \
, . · · . · : . · .- · . ·. . . · : · ti��J�i-
; .:',t\:�i�. .. . . ·
b. l�,ll Lh(: cicc;u�cc;i <:onfp�11,�• hu<;¾ ln lb<: nrs\ inst.fl.nC? ·sho..,_;n· their•
\
1.\1l'cc:in�nt with Hold Crown Pla7,a .bul \uler on chang�d with Hp�et;·:�ni��:
·,_?11, -�<��<:1 h,U:rnQ�linc�nLaJ "·'"d tht:n also f1v�,il-e� t�e. cc:rtHicute� i-�
.
0
�li(n'iW,f; · \
_of·. Hot�I� lnL<:�co11t1m:niu.1 bu� Lill •c;lijl<: rl()n.1: o( lh<: aboYc !11<Jnt1onec.·: q9i�) ;��-: • •, ·
uvr.r oMraUcmnl In th(: i;irnje<:L hf" lh<: ac.:c1,urnd comP,uny -and r�c�nlly·tn 1 :cl'.1�. ,
mimth_'�f Augt,-�L - S�pl,nmpnr 20) \ smu ·•:wu:I Oo�tbl� Tree. started. at :tn� . \
:.MH: .pl�c;�.-1.'h�� f!i<ll is IL$ClC i-urricit:pl. io' i.hc�w llit!: c:ni:ati.ng-&, on rr.autj· ,t�e ;·
pi,1·J nr: accLrncd · pors(Jns' d.,:rn l(I' ruiscly c:1mimitling ccmstl'\l-ction bf Hot�I · \
. -lii'l<!�c.��n�int:n.l�1i· in Ll�\�r pro{q�l ·11nd fur+h(:1� th<:a�ing �� \r��d ·,m 'th'� �a1rcif·;
accuse_�· pt:,rsom, is 1:1�s<> J-udged from the fact that th�. accus_cd ��tn-pa�Y.-' \
failed LI) issu1: uny lµLticr Lo its '.buyers· incl�dlng �h�: coqip\aina,nt 1"r/r glv.ihg
p(l��isslon 9r. ri::adj\ fc�,• 'I!Ossc_sslo'n prlc,r LO Comm.oh Wealth O,a.m�s 2019.·
•'t •
whi(lh w�I\ \he muln: t.'iH\Cn<m of p�1ylnu su<:h ,u htigc priqe (mor� than •'4oon4; \
mier' ihc, t}'\u·,·�cl p'rlcc. fo1· 'crq4l�aJc�l'll �pace: �l Lhllt-' f(>r, the: t.im�)
sp�ce:,.;. ·. .�au
·,,rrcrcq·by lhc l:H1CUsc:d c;ompuny,. Th<; CciJ'l'lj)lailj1mt lc)st.Ltpoh �-·hug� 'busines� '
oppnrt1,1plly by not. bc!in_g t,blt: .lo .open·�cr shb.p.'.durin1t'.th¢, period er Corb.rnon . . •;. :- .:
bh' · ..._ .. ·
�.
W<tlllth. th�mc� o l, 0 aifd. l.bcrcforc surr.cred'
a ·bl�'\o.s'(i IT\
0
,;r ��6y'.-��e.'.t'o.'-f.ai�f "• ,' I
, ...... .
H�g1,1run.c:c:s or th<! �1cc:f�sc':cl t�on1puny <>f <:C>mpletipg cM pr9j'eet bd'�rc, ,tt,)�
·· · · ii,augur�litm o_f (_)am<rn ,?.O � O.. . . .
. .
:
· . · :_ _. .: ·:· .' , .: : . ·:-: ·· · '.· :. .( __1
c: ·Th'at the: agr<1<:mo.nt io q�cslhm was mw<:LlleQ a(t(:r � moritl1s fron, J�e .....,. • :
dulc or Q�:;l rcc:r.ipt,(;f J>hym�'n:t �n? UCCl,ltiqd: pcr�on� .w�o·. w�re alre�dy_ aw.arf .:, .. \
• I
or thcir·malufidc' int�iHl'()rlS thcre'forc' in'·\i
.
very
cle�ct manner inentione:�· ji,
th« �c.1i�· ugrnc:mc:�l th·?·� the �rtich�r�s nnd prll')lc�· �dverti�!ng ��le��,;�/� \
not br. parl of eigrci:mc:�J.,. w,hic:h iL�(:Jr is/v.m.s ?n ci:rrencc on lhe i:arti_ctt�rs ·. ..
11t:cui-c:<1; pcmrnn�\ 8',:di:ul-ic;, t:vc:n prior !tl -��xec�1i�m. <>( agre_e�cin\.A��f�. . .. , ....
12.04.2�97, 1:11:c;��<:d ·pcmw1.1s ha,d t:<>ll��:t.cd un.umtsunt· <?i Rs., 1_4-.3�1,�{Q(� .. ·
,. .
... . .. .
(Rupc:1:�. roul'U:<!n L1H:s• Thirty Scv<:n. I housanq. _Ergkt Hun¢rcc an9�_lf.l]'�
,-, .
., •\, . .. .
Only) fr;pm Cnc compll1]nmit Wi. �h<: �asis' of pr:of;n6t!onal br9ch�{��l1��u�
prinL<�a p�atcr(.als _ _bl:ll! �1i1m1ii<->rta.1ly mcmjon_cd a_l paw� -No: :1-� i� pa�-:J�-f;{½�
.· · · . •.•
....
•
ur lh<: �tgrcc:mcnt, whic:h ;i!l mi incfon;.
• •I • • • • • •I • I •
.
I I ,:
:,;�.{'� :;1.
• 1 .�
. ,. �°' . ,. ..
"ft !s:e�pressly agre�f he,t�e?1'i' t.'he' part{�� thqt an!{•..«.#f.e.�¥,ii�j�tf,
• • I
• I • J ' � 11• '• :•,•• \ .,,... ;\ •
broch_Ut�\�• IJ..�n.d, bills.. f.sstf�cl b�- the Co�pcu1.y d�q.s. n�t.:�� -��1�,��.;...
of this.�r�e�ent, w�� tho Compa.n,y, '7'.�e ��mpati.y Js:� .f.f-W1�{ij·
. Che t�r:0-:�. ·a,nd �-�·r'llil�loti�. as tnc·orp_o'.ate� tn ·the 'D:��r�j�f�f� ,. ,. . .· :.
Comp��- or �fty 6Jf�cfo.l a�tMrlzea oy �h-e llo�rd of ·]il?1;�ti��ftJi·:. ·
.· · •· .• • · · _.,_,.1 I'•' t'••:� f.'• . • 1:•\ .:-i�.;th · . · ·
. .
.compan i,, .· · ·· • ·. • •
•,r..:t.
· .. · . . . . . ' 9:ltTuM ' :' ' ·. · °:J!?i fl· ,::·� �'-a.; '
ln Lhi� }ay lhc ac�Us{:.d persons Lricd L<; ._chcR�. 'i�s./nn�t1�· u
. ,.
' • " • ' >1•,·'i;l.-''
, ,,!1 •11 l� .
••
: -�'"Ai,;�1.i�.-.:t� ,I i
·1· :I.
. -� ...
1
.. •.
• , : ·;;{::;'t?:1•:11!•;
!'-i-t·��Pl)� �: · :
\tl�k' �-� I I
. ..J ' ..•.:� •i:1i 1� ,.:
I • :�..:
. • -i:.. ,·. ;�:;;i:/r�r.,1f!!•1r,1

• •:
. ....., ;,h.;.:J•L::l·:.i
'·1t1 t.. •l1,•
t I
·.•·
• • • I I:;
.. . ,·
....
.
I •
....
.
. '
•, .
'•.
.: ·:. ·:•., 120
\
• ·.· ... •• I • • ,• •
I
·. .'
• ,\: . .
- . !· .:·: •.
•
.
:,• .. •;•.,:.
.. :•• ..·_... ..•5.;_
. .. , ,:('?t t,'; .
.. .: �?!··:�1-.!� �:
:�r.::M•M·
. .... . t
•• I, i" ".\:'•,�w.t • •
:·�·:��.;:= .:
' • ,;.',\"'}\
°'. ''
. .
. \ .
•••
. . . . .- ··.. . .. . � -1:::t:·:·�ifR--°:.
J , :•:.
.. : .. . .. . . ' ].:; � ...

fnrm'i.ilfllihg a1,ri !�p{l�h�g liU<:h. 0nralr'· <!oricfillciru;:�n )t� ,awcei'r1�.ri
-��•�'c!rt;· 1,r' thblr }'>rojcr.i. whc, wcrn f.llr<:udy �m�nd: t<> the accus.ed ool'h?�TTY· .· · \
ha�ing pitd II hUgt! itrrfounl. of mcm11y o�ly. pn l�c public fac� �-nd• rc:p,u:��'tj��{ I
.of 1.h<i u,:c:ui;.;d t:ornpun)' w1lhm, . a having any 1<ll<l.�f a. do\,.lbtr of fr1:1-\.li:!:4.1t-'fl!f ·
i1)(cnliqn_�.or chc�Lt11p; �� \h<; �c.eu�r.d compa_ny.
•• • • •
J
I
• • • • I I , •••
. • : .\_i,.f{ � ..
:.:!1'_ i f o
d,•. 1'hol bCll\dr.� Lhc•· ub6µq n;itintionr.d. co_ndi�i.on the. a�cus�? pers?yts1• �}��; i-
• ;, • •• I ■ I •
•, • I o .C ••
,· lmpuscq scv,��fll <1tl!ur m;-ie �idaQ cp11diti:o�·s to ,iultabty_· modify ·unfai� ..

_ .
conditio�,·s.impo�<:d pnqts buyt:rs, whic:h i'l\ clt:ar\y the abu�e. �f ·dominant . ·
positlm, of I.he ,f.i1:i:uscdr C()mpm,y in .lhfs Cf.IS�:· al'Lcr ,recclv.ing/ colleittng -hugJ.. . .
!.
�\ll)OUn�:•�nd al�() .in rui;r,r.i::L lhci .ba�ic:·:righls of �he: buyerii, Th� e_arli•u� :·
()f
dclibc:raLion un the c:lt!'m,:n'ts �\l'\d (!l(l(!11l "o( ;ibusc m\\KC .it clear the ·aocusecl
pun\omr htil{C beun gl'o�!ily u.bi.:uiirig ·thulr. dmn!nanl _posi�ions e.nd that 'too· .
• • • � ■ I 1; ■ I •'• ••
�,��iM\•l� vu\r1en1blc. 1.-c¥:Ll.on !>h:<>mi�mc�s, w:ho have 1i�tl� _a�Uilt t?: �c�. �t
m·g�11.i:-:J: �,gah,st_ �u.c:h·�buse, 'rhc lilri�l ,1c'!.ion. against .the .aCC:used .p_ersQn�
mus,. bo _t,,ki:n -�1�d {:XC'l'·Plbry'_ C()�t··n:iust b� i.r;ni,mi<:d on -�he .�cc\'l�ed #erso��
·ron1,cir: 9la�::i11,I ::\btlSC �tr aominu11cc:; .. •. . I : (. • • • • .-
t • • • I • I• •
' h ' •
<:. 1'h� l th� .a busivr. practi<�<rn 'l'Cft:rrcd °l<> a hnvc, l:)a.vs: b�cm ca.rti�d wl'tl�· 09je�t !)f · ·
.... • • I •
\.1'nduc:- .q<mnoinic, g�ln� a1,d b_u;incl(i; r1rc>.�ls, On·· the·. othc:r- · ht1.t\cl1 .�t?�i ·
.1:mii-i.s1c'i.'l'I pl'tifalcc e>f .<!XM°IJling unru.ir ccmdiiions· ·and' no\cli'ng· oul Ja,ts\l,
l'C\')l'C!l;:ll�f¾liori's uncl m:ri:loillng lhc: oom'inan\· p()�"llJtllj ca:n' sce'ri.rrim1 u�� tie
_ c�undu_,:�.•�r· Lhc: U(:Clls�8 � pc:rsons_ �s �c.W!)� ;a�qve-. in _thi.s �ompl�il'l :-yh_tc�
I I I I I � • t t � ' f t (
I
�
I
,. arc cm:1,1nly. aggrav�tl11�_ .raclOrll, Tb_c..c;nn·�u�L. or_.the'_ a�cus.oci Ptr�t>n�-\'in .: . -�- '.· 1
al;:>ui-ing !�s d<\minant p�rsilhm, · rcquirr,s lo .he l,9}<<:• vc'ry �c'rlci1,1llly. al'lli· itii�til:�:- · · ··
Ll�h; Hc>i:!blc Court'· is ;n:qyi�cd u·,. adi,i,1 a d,iio:i-ent -�?Pt:Oach •: 5.� :lh\�i·.
l'<:currim��c.of :-n.1ch �01:��1c:l i11 su,ppc:�. · ..: · 'i · ·. ·. ·. "., 1• t •... · · ·.
o I, • • . i, ,•
I • ♦ • I • • I ,• I I
r. That l.hu:·am:�scd pcrso�. <:nariged 'Lhc ac:tua.l ·Dra�i�gs.&:?la•f:i�,'-w�!giji\y�i;il· · .•, . : ;

�hown (<r lh<:. Quycrs· af-i:� pre�enliy ·OJ) silc. ..<;�: rytni�ti is ··i:if�foren-t'•'1�lffu� :. ··' ..- ·.. · · !
'.
•.,.9... ·. 1 consln.dion is\:orfiplr.i.d} �iff<:rc��-(ln �it.r.... '

. • .• . . ;,I . . . • • ,· • •
. •' ";·• .: ·r�:)� ·,_\:. {
•. • •.. � •t,\ ;!I.'�,
. J ',,•'I
.
J
g,. �·ha\ ·c��:� ccusc:d }>n��io.�s: ll!lSUrcd. �(l' ll'lc: i;�r'<:h&:-'i()l'(i�y��orl-�_�'i��t��f- ,. . . .. ·. I

� .
the�• arc �timm\ltea ti>· 1�11."'.cr wc�II l�<1forr. cmmrphn "Wealth l�?-1�$;:�1?t.�$h ,
. ,�1ilc1.{ LO. 9m'nl,'lltllc'. thQ!i--\projpnl Pri<i_r le) t�i�: ·. 9�>':'nioh,
ihcrc:fon:� :lhcy ur\)1trarl1Y,: bm.1nd Lhe huy(:rs iUtcr rc:�clylnJrl�je.' �mt�E
) :_
..
:Y��f.i'_,�:,. . �tii ·.� . . · ·. : .. ·..
:;·· !
I
.
.,,•
r:n1.ich· 'prfot rrprn lj'l<: ,:x,:1;utlon. o[.l�cir' pn.<; sldcq. �grc:erncrilfl,iit.ij ., ' '., t.
1 1
· ,: ·. jI
that _LI�� ::L<:1_-m� .ii.,. <:ond��\9n�:��nti<>Md in t\16ir ag�qe�en��i!�('·
· �\� !. .t' ·
ravo'tmg :l<> lh·c. 1H:cu·sc1 <:�H-npahy, bt:cuuse, the�. ·wa.flt: ·
po�:,;mrn\1!i:i to lh� buyel'/ll'l.V�}StN/i wi1J1iri lhi� stipul�ted pe' . . ,;,11.
. . • .. . ,• "·• ··••• .,.j:, H-•lf,1 .
�- ii��-
·. . •1
. n�. . ..
.. · · ·. . . . '
· ·: .· . . · · . . : :-hi·:: 7. � \l;�ijl,2:j!
····�·· h·:. �:f(•tf):� · .
t•�1•�:j'h,: E.- :� • • • • J
·---�·:.�rt·'1. � :,, ...
• • + ;.•.. �•/:
• " • "f
J;·.• \,: -�·-. .. :1'.•1i, . !
• •• "'
·.··.
1,.
�·1wh1.
1 ,
. ·!,V��
r,.��•;!, ,:.:�•t .. .
., 1�tl�.1.: · · 1r• · .
..•'tt�1��•
.•'• '• ·-
��l�;£(i
f
• ..
... 121
I.
I
I
I
.• .
\
l
\
I
)
- I
' '.
.'
....
.. .... ' .-.
.. .
.. .
... ...
. ..
.,., ...
\I
.I
_I
122
...
0 .. .
\
- .. , #
. : .. . . . . .. . .. . . _ : �'-�}?''}· ':..lt·<: ·... J

. : '-�- . , . ·. . . . . . :,: : . . . . . . .. . -.... ,.} .
,lt\rting• rn 1.hdr bcmaf\d(..' -pim:hasr:rs, h(it:a\J$C: due! lo Lh\s-,�a\arid4 ecm�U_?J · ·
\\
;:r the:· ac:c.·1.1i-cd ·pcrsc)n$. ,·nv.1:i-1.ors/hUY<l!"·/PU•'(!h,1si:r i-vrft!'.ed v<:ry.·.Qe.�ly
· . ·
�€t?t :. , ·
:. :l ·
invc:i.tin_g itrth11 _proji:r.t or ape used pt!rsons ,_ . · - · .
. . . . . ,•
rn. Thal q��re was. no .s,1,1ch • brand m,,1111<:t:s. or b_r;n�1.cd 5 star . h<itdJ·�:·_�7.f:� : .
...
assni:iDf.(!d in 1.1i9' projccL uni;! I.he· at:r.qsc:"d perscm;,i: intcht�pnally �i� f-tlf� _:i
. mU\}1f\dc. inuin�lo.1,k n1tinli��t��- ih1: nam� ,!f �nmds :-,vill� t��ir .j;>rojeclt'N·J�� /
iniLial . stager to • Hllruct. th<: •mvc:�tprs and lh,llrnfon:, prt:��ntly no such. all$g!:� ·.
mm1<: nf b�tmdi-i.exists .. thc:.ni which' ,tgalli cm,$llL\ll.m, fra\ld .execU.tod by ;t})�
. • • • . • I'
. . • • ••
accused coi:npany on- i�ti g\1\libk inv�st<11·/bl.lyc:r /purcha:ser. •
n .. Thill th(!r<i is v<:ry mui.:h dlscrcp'1,ncy in 1.h�; prices/ rates· �s per print fofti\at . '.
• � • ; : , •t I � • : ' •
0
or "th1:_.<:pmp11ny'l-l \r.unq_1 trn�h;ol(.I µl Lhc· �lith'<:r rot.o t� t\'le c9mpll!,i'Pllnt· tn. ; :

. ,.· . Cllmp11rhlons C)f olh�r ouycrs, lo whom lhc ·�10�11.:rne� ,pe,rsoris sold 't�e !lr�a: _. .
I.
slLuulod In ll\<: 1-1:1mo 'lcfoution fl� llic m1..a:h·,losier rates f11 comparisoil!· of th! -.' .
l.i.!.�,·.._
! ', . . prosr.nt·cpmP,lainant ulid ln<l p,r'ci;<:n\ <mmp\ain'unl was l}()t-ii,ware ab()U\,s-uch
Lypc or. praciic:ti- by ll ;p1..1ildcr, .bcc:�l,ISC1 1.rfo t:�1�plai;1µnl -�ad then, t'.C��ntly
I.
1thifl<:d.from lndiu l<l.$-li:� IJ�nka ��-nd lhc c:omglaimml �nd her·hus·b�n.d WRf..0 I
OUI nf Indio raL' Lhal ,P,Cllnl or lime' l\nd I.ht: accusctf pc:rsQ°ns-cheate9 --�p�: : . t• i .l
cm-nplainl¼l'\L ,�i, Lht: t.1:rins of ra�<rn as there: 'is' very mi.1ch gis.ci.epa-nc�·. in' xb·� ..
.<"... ·: ..
. .
. n.1t1is fc)r. .the i:r:1mc spa.c¢ for <>lh'<�r buyers.· ·; . . � · · :· :· . : : · •
, . �). 1'hal lhJ. •'1ci:1.1$�;d p�;S�>·,;;'lbten�ionully nol. �:o�p!Qttld �hei�.p;Elj:e�t �iCMi�-:1bi• ..
I
. ··. ' stip1.ilatt:d pu�·i<1?, i.c. 39\ niotiths from lheir fir-sL demand in tne·mbpth �r Jct}� . · 1
.. 200?, \l{�ic:h·1:1.util·havt:'slurt<!d only aJrnr approval ,. of sit�:Bl�i W�.J.pi· -! :·
acc:us<id, pc:r:mn:,;, n,. Lhc· y(:flr 2009 m.cntmned in Uie1l' cprr�-stP.ondot'ic�s.,:tr.iit ·, · ' .
I f I t o I •· ··'•t• o • • •
I • I : •
• Lh<.'i1· �it��pl_ans hu11e, no-p"·,br.cn·.uppro�cd a'nd Lher,;a,ft�r c��i�d 'the')�p,�fM,: · I ·i; ·

• ,mm an.d ,nun:,br.r of lho ;arca/shi1p allotted . 1.0_ th� b�ycrs. · .... ·: ..J · ; l¥ ,i.,': . ·
••••1:·:
. • \
•
I 1 • I ,r • • o
.
o
.• .
1
•.. H .....
::':
:.lo
p1 1:hat. tF1�;ra<:c:uscd perso�� intenllo�ally r.iol.'prpvidc� the E!t�r·oved;�.ife��:� :·:

, .
♦ • O
J • ••
.1.111 �odd:y.- �> -t_hc·• pomplpmanl anp· nlhc:r b1..1yers dc5.pite t�·e·:fact�;�'li'�t:;·_tIBt ... ·
,:oiriptuidal'\l rcpcat<:dly dcmaridr.q. the- i;a1:1e. sin�e bcginnl�?Fhot�ti-�W�t\t· . .
_sr.vural u:_mails in_this rc�ifrrun: ann<:x<:<_J alf>.,ng wtth_prt;s��-t ·· 1 ��r'1}t.\¥,!��_-1{it·, . .
th(:_ kind �1mm)l_<:f thii; :11m:blc �mm a� AN��XURt�q. fe��
;) · ,. }.\ . \_:.,. ·: J
qt Thal th�: �ccu�c�_ pcr��n�. ha-vt!. �o c:xp\'amnio'ns in r�spect.�i��4,i�iJjlt.� , · . . I
lhc �r.c%'<:d P,crsons a�� thc."cxp\.ana\ion� for•c.��nges in du�t�·p'.ft'¢/�1tFij� ·· .
and lhti'·j,h:�cnl: form ,�( �()_n�tr�ctlo,n i� co.�pl_e_telr dffroronfti'��-
assur<:d �lam; and a\�o· fa1Jod ·1\c> m.:plu.m that h()w tf)ey allott�d·J.h�.��ro�.�ff
�w��\�fni' . . '•· I
}lftr.r snq'wir�� lh<: sit(:- plan without having ,my appr.o�.J:ii��*f:
.!•, ;, . ' • . • .
. .
. ..;.;: , :., l,·:·t;i�=f�j'��. =·
-#��'k.Jii�.
.. t.. -�•\) IIIJ •',I°'•!-·
·· ·
: , ,.
·.·. . ...;,�:;,. . ;.;:,.,:\fi�,aJ•·� ,. ·:.'.IL· ht?: :
'· - ',;.- · i,..<!.J'. :1�h·� . . ·
• ,:, ••1 • •
• .•. ' · l· ''•:••·, •i'' ��' .·

0
· · · · : · :,
.., . ..,...'·;�:� ,::,!,....��;t�:'1

• . . ·. '\· • • . ... ,. ,.,, .• '';!....,�
' • '•
..I f.l;•� ,..�.,:·
\l•t}•
. ···,':•,;_
�...�· · � . .•
.
:,<
.. ·: ·: .. ::, •• t :. !'""'i i:h · .\.' ...
• • f-. • •'•'-l••t-!.• ""'u!\1
4 •••
• .- ,·•. 1o..- -.-; '·.,t,.i•u ·'·H�
..
..
.. .. d
. K "' ·
.. 123
I \
. '
Photo;;�p;c:s uf �hr.,i"�;:pal' siw ph��- in this. regard are �nnc.xe.�-�a1�•r:��¼;i�."- . .,.. · : \

P1·r.s1:11t r.:iimplai�L .ror �ht: -kind p11rusal_ or. Lnjs.l�.on'to. Q(�\lt't ?s i\��:�1!·/. � ... : \
.! ft
·t·i.t;ttM>�s; .
pf
\
o 1
• I ••� : •• •I• I t • .. o
�-;�I:lJly
� •
r. 'l'hal ��c �::cirnca: pr.rs<!� ·cpn.��LL<;d_ al_.��:ti�e of .9�>�ldn� ��-�

urc .(:<>mt:11uc:d . to qchvor :lh<: l?O�sc�smn to lhc: compl�lnan� befo,t�
. C-nmrncm ;:Wc�l�h Oamqs a_n.ci f�il<:d _to ·do s<>: But, r1:µud...-i1ently ava:itpd:·•fM�\
c�im'plftlon• cc:rl_irlca ltl l'ron1 all �ht:. �Cl(:va.nl dc.partmr.n ts, Qt) p,�pers� p,:fof;- Lf}:; !.
1
•
• • \
c·ommcm· Wc:!",lllh Clam-cis and thl� 1tc:ry fuc:.l ·curnt:'in thb l<.nowledg� oft�<;. ••. . \
cumrilulna1,1:. �r.u,ir r<:<:<tivinli I.ht: C\1r1.Hicd. ·t:opi'c:s from, the DOA \.!rlde( tlid
l�i�ht l<°i lnrn\;':' al.lun Atil.. (�hol�>.t:o,:iic�·or Lh]::dcieum�nts·avail�.d u!:4�r �?;I \
h1 this r<��rd arc ,mnmrncl �.lqng wil� p1·c:siml, com_plaint fc>r-ch·e l<i_nd;perusaj
I or \.hiR' Ht\n ·�)\(� -��)l.lr,l a�rANNEX"IJR�·"C:t' _(CoJly, l . . . . . . . . . ·. \
I
I
�
�
I
,.
I'
. . . ·.
_.:::_'f.8�1
. ; .
l
.·
.I
•'
·
·.
' . ' : ••
124
. • •...! �',;,,,Jr
·.· 1
-
.·
·.
.
· ml)cr. :but;:rs.iii,·vc�r.ors .of ·_olhr.r, prnjccls pc1J9in_g c;o�_�inyin�· -;�f,;�;;\��·:;,.
�,r
· §J,<: pro,id�:1. in ·which prt_s<:rH ·<:<lrnpla\nanl• • paid• .her va\µabl�. am�>upt •t�tt�f- .. · .
•• ', t,·,
a.t:cuse•0,,:••P.t:rsons, ,. . · .· � • . . ·. •. . • · • '•:. :•1.:,
• •• •
I •
�
1 • •• • • o ,a_••• \ 1,�1 • ' • •
w., Thul F-h.c: 1 acc:1.fsc9 pc:rs<�h.� _ul�o -u.d.�>pC�si'. th}: �1.�. �- ' n�y''i· n ." th�i/
.t
• ?- � � r. ½ �'. i :<: · ·
• I � ,:
I • •
� d i ·.·
,· Sc:clor--.•:.14 projcc:L un�·brfur.cu.l.ed lci·IJl l l;l.rc,1: . •1. � o par�s a11d aJs9·¢�eat�� .
t:hr, ·pur,sci'.ps, who. invcs.�'id In Lh�: sai� �.\11othc:r prnjc(c:l of �he lf�cusc:d; �r·s�iti� ..• � ....
in
.. 1;1}1Q us�cf 1.0 ·shHL th�c pt�j(:ct t� -an�_l:h�r:. 1 • �R ·
saying•_ u,a1. · _Lhr.l� •.115:w .'.f)l'(>j_<:ct is• m\.1c:h mc:r� v-alµaql�: �n cc>mpa.FJ�. r.:it :�r.. . :. .·, ...
'
'
proj<:1:L 'in· whii!h_ lh<:y ·{rn� irivc:�l!:d·. Phol.c!copi�s �ir. rcl�va.nl c;lQcyni�nts. �f- .:, .· .
o
�
.. ,mother. l')°rc>.i;:,:1 am· ��·ni:xcid �l<>n_g :wfL� present· coinpl-a!n.t ror: the �.in
;
porutf!ll' c>f this-l.fcm'blc,:�o:Url tl!i ANNE�URE•�·(�ol�Y;t• ··. ." .. _

· ·· -'.
x. 1'lrnt l11c acciusccl pcrsc>ns· arc hablL\iul Clffcndcr-and therefore, they :nc:>� <m\y
.
• •• • I • '.- • • • • • • •
chcaLed' lhc <:omplai�a.� L other invr.t\l:QrsJbuyer ·but .. al. s o abfo tQ gef..°th"e · -'··. · . : .
°
Govcrnrt1<:n1.·-�s well dc:$pitc: l�e: fa.ct LhaL• Lhc:: <:<>n.slr.uctiQn w'drk at :�•trwa�·
or
cnmpll��i<>n ·ccrtificat.c 'b<:forc lhr. 9001rnon Wealth :pam�s· ��:d chea��d ,.."ttj#·: . . : .
:' never cpmpl<ttcd ·al thkL p,oihl of time and no· aorrespo.nd'enc�:.- l!l'llid.c:, il'.l :
rcspcc_t .pr'· giving' po�!ll��sion to thr.·. c:on;'plairian ts, j,hich' clc'arly: ·ittqw� _th'�Y
.I· I.he .";Jcc:pi-ed p_,ihoM ,�fil<icr lo. t:omplc�tci lht:i r pl'<ti�c� .till 02, l 9:201p: v.{4tg ..
compJai�t Fur.'_t�c·kind �,:r�sal of l�h; Hnn blci ·c.m.irt'as AN-WEX�RE ..'��.!\'· _'_ �1 ..
....,,.., .. 1.
(
!· rc{c:ordin!i dated· ()2.10 �20 l Q i'n ;Lni11: re-gard ·arc amiex�d .along With1 p,re,�e'nt ·· ...
•'
y, 1'ha t in·:_ the· ·,;gh;, .;>f ii:ijove· mc·n tio�<:d r,{�:l; ::its· cl�arl; transp�·rc�
1
a<.!C)..ISCO.:. pc,:�(>n� '.in . i:()nriivance of Oc>vt:: ·Depa�tmcint:s: :?,mdia��. ·'.Wh'J . . ;

\ ·.
-�hi�,:��
I rac:ilitu'ted 1.hri ·u·ccosc:ci'. pcr�on� �ind isiiur.c;l wrong repm�t;• for th�fi;-'. <i;_,,ti
mJ>nr.1'.ur.t g;llns �rid ·�g�1ins� the ilHcrc:sr.'.of the:. invm:tm•/b:uyers at'-ld.;•qatiP:�1 .. '.
.whic:h m,,c,unts 1.0 di�l-i\>cyin_g :�hr.· law, wi°lh' in_t�n·t· a.n�:fran\ed -i��p.ir.c.r.t
x��-
I
'·P th.c;Ja�t�r�
1·
i'
I dC>CIJll.'lCfl_l: by. kno�1,g.'iha\ the �amn will: cau,s� rcv�!'}l,le
wlrn:h i1ri;.ali.o <!ht:}llin-g.&, fraud on th<: parl,.<>f acc\.rne�(pei'sen� •. · · . ?:.>:..· ·-.�
:-.. rh�t ��}1CC\.ll\(}d persons ;u·s1: �Rv<: p_aicr"ihi b�ibe '.l�>
t l:,;:
�•-.i�i��·
' , ,"I t �-.. ,1 I •
· '._ .
:.
t • 0 0
·cxt.��t,£��:�
severa.1. .-tJl:ptlrlm<mls,· .iLs ofncia]i; a·nd s'LaJ( ,pcrll<>hS 'in-·� �r to;·?-.�w.�rffi1� .. , . .1
b�nc:fi��:-�,r Lhcmsc:lva�. :an� �ga_ins1. 1.h�: c:01np�inani am:li:•. ... ,nal11t��!��- :
l·foncc·:. n!�Jgc · monetary; bencnls _avu)kd �due· w wrot1i� 1 :�taji)m�JlW1 : ., . .
c:o'mpl�!�?::'I _<:()rliric_::il(l fr01:1 Lhc:_ �(!��i Dcvcloem�n.L Autnort�f �lh� ,,1\��·1r� : . .
I
Cortth1i�:1]<>n c:lc, m ord,pr l<> show Lhal Lhe, pr,<>Jccl. oi thtJ��selq· fg�p�j -_. · .. I
I
·:
i
1
I
. ,.·!•:.t, :vas c:oTr':lcd b<:Corc L�<: C��m�?� Wo11� cl_1 c;��:es , · :. ·. (

/�i\:· } f:, ,��{�\ff .. ·: ..·
I.
1·· .
· j
I •
"-i�· . �' f.UJ, �h�L l��ja<:�us�:� pc:n,tll11> in ord�:r t.c> snvc: _
:heir i;kl_n� ll } a, �\��,f:�i:_fiti��5,
1I.
I •
•
, ..'. .
•
• •
•t •
,
•
·
•
• •
'. .
> •
, ,. '
:
:,
:
• X1/, 1 • ' I , Oifi�. i;,'
• '•' /,\M{· : ";J,'•·I \ -�1•ti.
•1:4°i.�
•• 'J.. . , i,(frf
f t O
· I
f •,ti, I -·
.'
♦ 1♦ I ( J ....
•\::'(!� t�- � );: . 1. •!.i . .

•' 1.,:\� •• 1•1 1• l .•· ,; • '•,.
lo;_i I 1 �l 11;1 1• I ;
r , ) \ jlt ,
� �, / , , J:'r• ::;,\• -��•\ � UI;; •1 • I 1

·.:. ·;·•�'°:'
·1(�S• \� •.� • f :Y�•I,, �! I (I�, • ..

:, '.. •• 'J-•',,,: , ••• ...,·.�:',· ,:' ·.I� ,, I •
'' . •
;,.
., ' -:.�\Ji�l:F• 'i:�(f}.:,.�f1;t\ ;i '. . • , •: t,

1
;:-•
•,
' : • • ,,_h. -:• t.·�.•,\ ••,• •\�JII f• •; . •
.1i ••
•• • • }' •
...
.. .. '·
. •..
..... . .
.
. . . .·
-" · ...
l •
' •,..
·u ��u � ,. Jttf
'• tl\
'.
19•1 ••• · •
..
. . ..
,.
I, \
l
.,
�1
I·
. '
.
!, ., . :,,,:• •. r\:..:� (/
.· · . �-'.{ -:
..-. f.f· . .
'
.
'•
. . . . ., 125
•:
c:hangcd the: cvqry.J . hing C>n .the pre. ex� o: . ��i��;:� !}�!
1hc.bc1naf.idc pt,1rchQ.s<m1
' : ::
�Ji.an \Jrt1,oul inL\m�Lhg \,() invostors/buy(l_f}� •witl: t.hc: active

t
�h,i
con�tv,iri'. � ��
oov�. O.rfic\ul:-i · und L�c:n: is dc�r ·. ct1� c:hl:fjLl'lg• a.1id fra.u? <>n the •?a:f� :tlJ- .
ac�usc:d •p<:1:l;-\<>ns: b<:Cl!l�·sc, thc:r,<: w�s· no r�:anbn or_ grc,>1,1�d· tc, ch2l.��6- �h!: '.�it�·· .
. . pl,rns �ma all 1hn; h,1ppc!nlid w1l\i th!: �H:l,1�<:, <:onn1vc1nc� of �ccus�� .��r$:ot\�
.
wi1h{:,1<;holhc:r,:· .
. .·· . . . . . . . .. . . .-.. . ·•.:::;- ··� .
.
bb. . 'fh�l t.h<:.' ac:c.:i,l�cci p<:r:.o·�ll. 111ii�1sc.d._ thcir ,nc�X\.lS with . lhe· Gov.t.; ()'f[.�ci'�f�;.
.
.
1l'gujn:,,(' 1.hc, bttycrnl lnyci�or� and igncfrc:d, all Lne ·rul_e '&, reg�)aJipri .:,�r
.
�illol1ricinl _rrcirn the: DDA �.nd rc11olo (he 'allc>U<:o,,arcu in pa.r'tlj on· th� :arbitpit.y•
I •
r11I.C 1\,.'whic:h .m·i: ·mm�rury l() llrn law Clf lh1s lMd f)nd 'chc:aiinli & rr-aM
· cm L�cj purl-of· �rnc:i.HiCO :pcr:iom;, , · · 'grcat· ·· · · ·
0
.. .
c:<:,:'l'hal ll'j; acc:v�eQ pc:-siint1. ll;l;it,i c't�d· fl hugc:.a.t-noU�t;fr\>� 'wrpn� corrir,ttlt'11\ef1tii . ·.
I I
• , •' ,
•
1rnd ill�gaily <:ollciclM mc>ncy,.' whif:h: h1ia··,b.cen the'•a9c�li�4. u�ru�el. �Y:

·
person_�: lo b�lbc_- l�c'. Qfficia_ls,: -��iq�.· s� ��I� l�a��-,b�el'l·�s�� -·◊o:,t�.�- · .:· · ·
·- • · · ': ·.,'.
p<>�t·.:
project. • • ••· ·
.
dd. Thal Lhqrc!' is rn<:<�gn!zablc difrc:r<:ncc it:' lhc-. c:ommu<t�ion.o( }:l�rc:1- �:!"��-• ·· :
:
•
■ • o • • o I• '
:
• -• • ,
:':� ! •• • '•
in. c:on1p1Hison with sh<�PPil1g ai:µ" urid usqd V{:ry inf�i:ior '-inat�;ia.1 iri' th�· .
. .,
. '
by 'chc i<;'c:�seo·p.cftli,)l)lj•, ....... .-·, ...
;,md i.1irnd )J()l',V /tOClpplh� �ll'lHl· bC!ct,1i111<! Lh<:'s{irnc wa:. 'tilrc�uc,ly sold
O<wrir:ig-or. nm t:101.cl ,-;tm:u, bcca��t thr.·'llJmic;, was lel.'qut· on lea�c py. 'tqe
I • I •• r 0, I .. ' •
..
m:cuscd' ·<:c-impiiny rnd,.'il� ditCllt()rs, .which' amounts· to' cli�tinm .,fr�u��fud

�rirninai'\,r:,:�ch cir trusf ()�: the par� bf l\CCll�Cd perso�s -wi-th CQn1pla'.jihU'�?: ·i'!
'ill furLrir.r S\,lbtnilleQ �h�l l;nis (ac;l chuld be ;v9rifi!!Q t,y any.Q.ne,baving �fS.er�l·
. . . ':' :
. •
...
. •.
pl'\.lrl<:n(;t\, ' , ' ' J
i,:
;,, , ·
t' ., • -�:I ,�.
1 •
ue.1'1'1 a I lire: �.c:c:u sc!d_ p(:rllc>.n s _.fna r111.gc!d t<> • a tlru.cL th c.:, bona:fi� purcn�l'<:f.'··iJ��
•
• • I t • o e
• J :•, I •J •• \i::i� •�
•1
I •
•
•
: • • • ' '
•• • • • • ·- • • •
tnnnc:m'i�f inyc�lC)fS in· ·a vcicy prorc,fll\iCHl-E!I .wuy bcClU,l'Se ·, t!rte�, a.re ;.��-�\fo6·�
S.?TTIC· :�.\:ISir'tc:s�: ftir. lhc .la�L ��vera.l. !(Can;' �nd US(!tl, tcf:§.nreateaj;�,,�!. iiU� : ....
bona�dq}tivc$lOrs/b'-!�c:r� a�le�. ::rncepling hug�� rnon�y ff�. fne.�:{ft�¥��0. r ·. .
. f
the }�<:��sct:P�ri.cms �r� )1g :g�1'ls a hab 1tual' 6ffe1��:f.f.f.' anc\� \ ��e�:�rt� . ·
_ _ _ . an.
-1.
Lhrc:a lW��by _saym� _tha � 41 Lli 8 t they n:'ay:de,��cl l �%-of't�i�our��.r:�!.�S • · • . • • t�e. :

<�n� cc\�t;�uc:_cc:cd _!,rottt lhc:� d-uc lll ha�1 �g b1� legaj nt;�, af��,1��..�- · ...
.
_l!HISC'.I'\� 1 l_ht! higtt_ <:lu�_s .(}ovL. ()fri�!al1nnc\ ud1t'\g B1,1re.� ai �s c�,f��!?llf� .. :·:
.
�
and 1r f\ryon<: w 111 tr� �() 1ndul{{� lhm'fl O(', l c1r compa.hy t1r1l�-9:tj��r;�ijt,,t . . .
W1Lh
:
. . .
c:as(: �lrn bmll� of Lndr Oft<-: s1deB ugrccmmH they ·may.CO.f,l�l i�fi'iM��r�,,_•
on
, vc:arit i,h. oou rl.s ,lnd fiti�1l1y · w.ill :,'1c1L ��y or ·,·e'tu�t-i . ariy sihg�'J>�nw./�9-..
. �ifJ. ·
invc:stoti:lju,vc:1: ,m� 1tirlh·c!r. l'c:bul<cd ·l.h�1L · ,their ca�� wi\it� �r#,��Jd'J ·
. ··�:1?1i.
' . . .
•o
• • • .• . • • �j
I/J :,
jI ··il :,, . � .
�n
• • I
07' I /,'
':'1·}·· . ;,
1 0 •.;
. . . . ' .. -'·.·,
.
..' -�L: ,.,,.:;.a( , t,I.,

.... -,.,.·-f�-�·r"··
·
·.·.I.
:. . ) . ;s.-1:a,
I
I: .
• • �• "� •i\: I !:
..
. I. •
; �- .. , • ..
. .... { i,.•11••1••;:,
1.,· t· �i•.
.. ;; ( r�{f��i��:•1
·,.,, ..')I
:. \t.• ·��
i •
·'I'.': 1
: . ,'V�tr.}
· ��i
fi'r .• ;,,11•• •· . • .
I I,
. 1··
l":,t,·....
.
�
.
'.. . ..
,.
. •:
I • I •
....
.' .
...'
·_ · :r , . .r•-rrm11m1m11rr-1
•
" • I .: • of•
•
♦ I • t I _•
l.t '
126
i \........
(D.
I
1
1·
;
"Ii -
\_.,., :
.. .
,. . .•
. ·--
•',
·, .
. ,..
•:
...
127
·1.
'
I·
\•t.
.
.r.,·,�
.. .
�
.- .
•, -:
..
• I• .•• . .
. .. . • •
.' ♦•
. r
♦•• I . 0
.. . . .
. .
• I
.. .
128
..
. .
.
�
•. . ,,,;:.-rr
... c._,
t . ·. � _,· ••
' ·: .
::.·�,.,···
,r • .�1•:, • I·
, . . ·. . .
. ·'( .:
'' . ,; 1• ..
t�i-��\)cji(;: · · . : •
,·
fo'�1.'1 her µS thc:y-.all 'we�� h'c ben<:ficlary M 'lht: comm.iss\��- of.

i
48.
�1-
i ·
�:j-J c,rrc!ncci;/nd_ �� .th.icy ,1ll'wprn havl'ng-vioil in _Ll1e�r kn�wh;dg� Xht�\hc}[1• ·....
· 1:111 1-,1b[lvc·.mcn1.ionc:�J 11c:h; an(.I <>mission 1irc: 1:1-'.�<�ngful in_ n��l;lr�, �utf}�!ll:t�41.; ··
wcnl ·uheB� in c:om�nis�lon or•lhe above; offo_nc:e� .with th_e1r 3:foresa1�l!;\1:�� ,._ ..
opcra11di,. ·causin�· .lhc' c<implainant. a ·-hug� wro!'lgful: loss up.or:i ·.�cf.-V_\1B:·:t\. ·
. Crimi11c1'l'.Conspi1•� c:y l�, Comr;icin �ril:<mL'.<>J1,·fl.i; ccmtr:m�la�c� �/�. \2�:a.;�r.d..
-
:14' l'PC: ,Tho ·�rnc:usr.d pcrsc>n� h.�lv� w1llf1.1t_ly .and. m_,icn�l,o�ally.- a._1d ��:;:g�� :i_
>· : t �
it
_
<>t.hcrir1 1 (l�c:il' 1:1cl:,; wllh r<:spcic:l �n·tlw •off<mt:'t'.:i- <:omp_l.aine�. a;l;>ov� apd fls�r1QY. .,
1
thc:ir omi:.;silm ·�11,H (H>mmrshicm nhd.lt:d 1hr, <>ffcn<:es complaihed. within the
mc}ining or s1:c1.ion 107,ltlC :h�md hcm<:c h'.avc:: cc;mmitted offencc:,(Ji�s r�w-·
I PC . .'
•
. � . -: . . . . •' . .'I . . : •...
• • • • I • •
• '
• • • I•
l'
:■
r .. .. ,.
. I·'
i" \ � , · �
49. : ·i1,at u�· I.he: -ur:c:u1rnd t?r.r.sc;n� have: c:oh,m.ilcc:d, c:c,gnh��ble·•offent.�·s
.·
406/407 rcud wiLh. su<:�lon 415/420/ l09/,l2C>"•.8i34: l,?C within tp.r:.
u/s . : .'
' jurisdic�ion or Poi'I,:<: Sl.a11un.cl( lµ,QW a.nd Lhci"compla}nanL loqgi:d �.co.�plamt.:
1 ·
L
l,
;.
' . 0
.�c(cirr. ihc: -1wllc:ci �LaHcm flguinsl �h,; accu:;cd,' per�on1:1 :�l:iich wi� -�l.lly,
,1.c:,kno:"r�ogcd !18 recqi� � iin I (>.0�,2011 v;l�c. �.D� -Nt),: '4'9�3.
; (C�P�;P(!hq
cnmplainl-dfJ Led .I 6,05.W 1.1· is Fl�r-tt:x.ed hcrr,w\th as ANNE�U�.l:!-"T11 : �- , ·::. •j • • IS • • ,•: • I
·!isfdi . · .
: �-
Thi1t bc1ng aggricvnd from l:hc: a<;l.s of "the ac:cu:-;e·d '.persc)�s ·

·
50,
· 'su(Cclr!n-g ii· huw:, wrorgr1.1l lo:;s tmd' U h�·g� .,wrohgful ga:ln• 't() · 'th�\-ii·��,.�c
1
' .
rnunt.i<m<;d, flf,CLISi,d' f)Cl'SC>l'l.k,. Lht comph11i1c1nl' prefers this c6rrtpla.1nl�c·r�rr '. ··
. .
... • 1.his H1m'bl� Col;!rL.
•• .: • •
. :· : .
: I, •
· · ·· · ·· : ·. ·.
o ■ I •: I
I
• • ••I
O
•
l ·: \l ·
! I: •�I t,f:' •
'
. I
' 1
rm
■ •
.. · )RAV -11. is 1.h<:rn(orc, r.nmil rr.spcclrully pray�d ·l),efQr.c:. tb!s·.. �l�i�;�\e,

CrntrL-l �cll !n _vir.\Y·�r \�<: pb�ivc 1,:i.r.1,qo,rlfd J a.ccs itnd �.frc�rris•t��/c·r�,(.: · , .
.:
• Lim �i'<::.�cnL m alwr, Lhis__ Hon'_bh:, Co�r,l' ·m11y be, pleas;1e;! ·.:.,:� (i},:,.... �'a.�ij ··
. _ . .
· 1:ngn1:-i.a.nc:<: tlg�rn1sl Lhc:-·1wcused' pcmw11s cinp LO summon.,,1:.ry and 'Bufl!.ls:\i ':
0
th(! ·acq{J'/\tld; pcmwns ror the commilrn,i<>n of 'the- lµJQVC. 'me{{�o.h��

0
.
�:og11'ii�-b)�: OffftnCCS, in 'atc:o�da-n_cr. '1/lth' hi.w, ·(iiYl'o p�ss any �-tl'li:r ·ati��f\lf:��f
rcth:f/lifdcr- wh,ic;.b this '!-lon'.qk:- Cc,ur1 lc<:ms fit a•N,):i .• ·pro:��.i-;�, 11,� ..
w.
ar.c:_ord:� n·,:c: i!.h Lh.<: rnc:_(s l�; Gircurrrnlanccs <>'f I.tie q��·sb a:?\f��inii:-
�,i.
·1.h(� int<:r.esL or ,i1Jsl'.i'c:<: • wcil as:cir the <:ompla1nanl1 pelitio-iiif:, -SdJ!� :�rigfi�t·.
' · :: ·· ;
Ccirnpla\�anl. 'i'.h�ough �:ounscl . 'vlNEll�' 8A.itl, &, /\SSO�f�1E�
•• I· :y,., . ,, .
\�:r.��!��: . I·· I
,�,;$ -�
· •f)ATI�:,� r•or,_ PA1'� ·PIND�R. (l't-JDl,A_l _l,A:� ·-F.1_�- --·q � l'�· · J'
_ �
. :I/ 115,:�A.M�SH NA<�'AR! N.�w ·oe;r•.Ht• I_.I0,915 CH,, No. f�- t�·. -WI� �....
_ ,
HAZA�t-po�JRTS (PH <n100.9_21ooi 11 . :. · . • -....: .• •l•�.: :r1J,:.�:.i��'.- '.',
/
I I •
•t•
:�
,
l
1 I
•••• i,:: :ji• �1,� • , ••

,I'
� ·•.:; ;_ i· � ,.
o p�I •• ,,
1 ,
.
r.
·F • ., •. p .. I •
., . . i· ..
' 11,• .. •:: . •
11·�\-:
•,•�tit:'.i�
I. .·.1 ·.. I
..."•
\
,. ' •\_' -,.:>· •s· ···� "•1•··'11• ,:.

I
• I • ;, .
;-:��•�,\·:-,:i t.·1.1 · ..
o :
·.�:··l
:
I· . : ·:.:,· .
t , I�
' � :, � :)!f>.•.t•�:�;!1!1�!'
1
tl�.d;q•:·
I
! 4
0
;;i�1 r'A •1
.
.
. · .• .'•;vy •.,·11>."·.r
• • • • •• •
·,;
. .· . ' \ . .. . · . ·. . . \-1,��i! � ."T·•:►r .
�:-t.·.
r •
\
�- t · · !�'M;�ril}f
,• . -�>��,��?, 1· i\'�,....·�;t,
'. I
• • •,{, I •,
J
� I
• 'I
.,
iI
Io,:,• .•.•,• •• • o
.'
•'.
,I .
I
. ·... .
. .... ·,
.•
.
. ' ....
. .. . . . .:: .. ..
. . .. .. . �-
129
...
,.·
i.
' . .
.. l":..t,-�
.., .
: o:
'• .
I • •
. _, '
, . .. . I
O
••
. ..
... I
... , fh'I : f
••
··. "lj"
• • I
I i I' 'Ill'.' 11 I '\II' I ' I
I
• • •
130
l
i-
•'
!.
I
I
(
'·
..
• i
i' .
'
j.
: .
... .
. . .. . , .
. .-.
... .
o O
• I
·'
... •:
..
,· . .. ' . . . .- ; . ·. ;- �-.�..r .;....
'l'�c c:ompla.hiflnl: �a� glvcn n:Hi<;11d<:iH:c: v.oJI\ r,rn<:i-1rcd and br�l}lg�L (ln . the ga!)c: . fHt;. '"�: 1 W1f \ .
... .s 131
8
sta�cmt!hl wus.rc.cordc!l IJ/s 161 {:r.p.c. 11..w a� 'n<>tt:d that.the c;ornt:ily.1.n��t··: ·
was· not. fo. regular l<iuch wil:h the· ccmipiny. C)n::09.09,l l° ·ch.��lt�g<if:.
. Comparly. wrmi: a l<!llt:l' lo \ht: -(�omplr.iina111. J(:rmir,alil'.'g;
. the �BFCetn<tnf�,H� .·· :
· 09.04·,2007 <H'I<:· �i�·<1dly. , . .•
. . � :: _''· ·.: . ·
f I � • • o • • •
I t I o •
0
. · 2.' .Q.!ll'� .11 .\ b(Sa,r;��•-� il·�dh �l'h�1· c1ompltlln_ii..n� ·�o·okeo·. t�tl ��ip,::. ·: . . · .
Nt�..f:3-21 fi, Plot (l, 13A,. Ln�by Pl(lbr, mroR HoulevarQ, M1,1.yur1 Vihat,
l)isJ.rici. Cent.re:, ,.Mayur V.ihaJ' Phase·-\; New O<�ihl· by·: lill{hg · Ute··. ·
•, �ppiica\,\on,.Ji'()r\11 on.. df,ltti4· 06.12.2006: 1'.he·.·allegc;d comp�WY also ·
.
'ls&ucd lh<:. payrncnl rcc9i\�l :>f Shop_ f'l'O,. $·2\4,, The cot;nfiia.l't\arlt· ·
. cntc:1:ed inui _ the: .Pmream�.nl with t�c :�l_lcged ·conip�n� �rr-Q9·.�1,2QQ_?; .' · ·. ·.
l,u�cr' cm th<l t\ll9g(:d t;<>mpuny 9.har.l'gcd· the:: �hop)rom. ?-'�l-S- �tB�Q1,
1,obby _1,,t!VCI, P:l�>.l Nq.13A.•Jft, Shc�i,,plnt( A_rca,<J·�:.::•!!1.1_ ·-<!at�./P:�X.·.:.. · \•,:
c:1ifllplu11�11n�
. �u.d PU\Q J�ll, o'i.?,86\(�96/·••, .... . .. : , .• . · ·. . -�· . �., · .
' ' . • • • ... . :1. ,·. . .
The nwjn ullcga_L,lm1.of t.he comr.,41.inan� ·is lhal t}uni.ll�ge�f.cornpaiiy·hid::, .· · ·.
changed 'thr. lc1ym.it sho�-111 t.<> hitn an'd also cha.nged: �he lqc�t19n._o'f .t�� :s.p�p. . .
I • frdrry lo9by nc,or to: �srnk �if,{c <>f .-lhc �omm�n:cial .plat;e.; .Hr in.foritlt-d.1.t°hb . ,.. ; ·:·,. ·.
l)in:cwr':Arnit' 8o6d. lo �:ancc:Ji hfa 1-iooking,"ifnd rcf\lnd his ··paymqn� \'r.'.ltb •....
• I
,nwrcsl bul h<! went· or)'' p<lrn�adihg (hu't°Jt:'wc,uld::bc 'better. lo.Ol,l.C:ib�1 .. ·t.,•:...,J ��
. prt:t,1,iCJl.lS · on� u11d· tr th9 _ 1<1,C!ltlmi W<>l,lltj n<>l, 't}C!' �() gO!ld '·than.·the. coiyt11e:ny·.
• t • .. o •
... I • t
I •
..
••,.
1/-'0l.lld r(}fl,lnd hiii paym<lh� w.l�h hler-9�t. ACLt:r l�a.l_ h:e visited i� th(�>fit'i�e\�f ·
the
•· c:<>mBany a numbcr'·<lf tlfjlc� b1.1t �he cc,�p�J1Y didp't PEI.Y. back. h1af.bq�� ....''�. , ..
amo�nt,, r�ther lhtly s�artt:d tr.Hing lhal Lhc ·sh<c>p' No l3.-t>4 ·w�$ qa.n��h��- t
. ..
• • • • •• ,. .,. I�'
w.iLh inu:rcst. ·. ·. ·, · •· . ..
•
had nm . . p,aid {.h' e b,l.bmcc:. pflymcmL
I
.
'l'hi: c:urnplainant. 'Yas gi'{cn· noliqti tlrid ,1;1(1 1K.c · C(>py ..�f ��v,p�eQ�f\.1 ·
... ,,.t , ,,,;�...
c:c,m:sp<>{l�OI\(:(:_ Wtll\ tmicui:i)d' and b'toL1g_hL ()n ·. tbe. ca.s-�; me ·�r,4.-•,; �e, ,,
I
swlr.ni()nL-was r<�<:nrdc:d tJ./� 161 r.r.p,c!, It. WfJS noted that .t1').e c.orf1.Pi-l�iP,an:i.
t I I 1 •· 1 .... ' f I f I '
J
\
:was ·�r1: i.n rc�.ular · lm.�c·h wi�r: th_e_:c�>�p�ny .. ()°n� 0,?,O�f l. t��; '.�i�� .
{
Compat1Y' wrolc. �'.· kittc:r. �<> the fc)�?lhmanL Lcrrnmallng ·th�-·��c1itr-i�·.�atF. •
()9,04.�_�Q7• �>ttc;'st,dr�dly, · '
·. •.•••r1{.i; , 1 f!,·:h: ..• · .,� ·· "' ·
• ,1 • 1•\t r J
i' '•1 �1 �
I • "-'
. 1·
•!
I • •1•� •
•
. . · · � •); •'•)tt
. • •• \ I • •
i
• f' i ;- "'
I!. .• • • • i ,. ,• !i l t•
,.. . . . . ,. •· ·.. , :•.•1 ·�"-..!l-::;,.1 . . ..
· .. . . . - . . ·. f:� :�-�--�-�:�·�;t�i,; · :,
to.:t(mi';W��1br· . ·_.:. ' .
�tfLY OJ:.DOA . . '
6ur�ng .u�·<:' c:04r�,: pr inv<:sli(l]l�i<>tl nc�Lic:d. was iss\.1ed
DDA p1'�>Vt�t:o 1l:-; rcphc:; along' wi•.h <:opy 0(-1.l'w complete'• file, 9.f-j�}�1�r:. .
prnjc1:l •�iiua_1.<l;i •'.l 1�1!,1. �o,_1:-i� ·&,· 13B, �ayur Vih·ar, -��lhi:
t:>mmmt:d•,Hidbrwr1aa . sund<:r: . . • ·· .•. ·.'."t•,¥t1�i��-
��,m1j�t�� · · A
-·�
.. ·. ·:-.. �. '.!�f: ·• (fj'•�
· / ·;r-JN�Jt
:
(
t
-�
: • •
. :·. �-;;1��iJ,:1lf
. , ''iry!t1�J· fty:itt,i ·
··-. ...'�·:Xt'
. it�t�tf n,1. '
.,
..
!�: .. ,i !' I
:,. 'l
I.
.. (•'
. · \"t.t,·,
. �
.. , ·, . .•. I .·, •
...
. •'
.. I
'
,. '
11 ··n-111 ?"11' f I
I
'I I .
132 \i
1\
'r .
11
I'
,,..,
I •
' .
;
\. .
.
i
: .
i
\.
1
1.
I •
'
< . .. .
. . - \·.
•e
I
:,
...
·•. i
' . ··..
e
.•
1
j.
!
·I
...
!,
\;y.-"°
r:
; I
• l
.. '
I\
: ·
l .
'\- ...
'
..
I ' :
I •
• • ■ '
.. . . ., .' .. ��f1ft:!\\;!..:::..,.. \'
,:.!�:\� •·• ,
133
40
•
:\t;
. .t�i�Lri(:fCt:nll'�!, Delhi _i�- lhc 11arnc 1�( Pn:•L;iun<:� ()� f•'uture Pr<)jftCts{�it�i��r�'. ; : . :_.
• • O I I • � ••:
O ·•
t'
. ,,twin.mg u ilc1:nsc/i-lp�l'Ovul/sam:uonc:d plan., Iron, the; Dt:M. or a.11.� .,,.c��r.� .. :. ' •. .'
,.·
. . .
. nulb<ll'i(�. 'l'hc AS!.il, blr.C(! ��)I·. ��A TCl>ndd· L�aL t9t: 'tlisp(>_s'al �f:s��j.o&,19;��- : : 1, I t
f1.i•._t
,� plots werc OI") rn:1ihold)ms1s .�hrn1.rnh th<: p1·0<:t:i;::, <>r �>pr.n ��.uc�1on ·'IlhI�.Pid�:·�/ ..
Rov,:,·nr.� 'py: lh·o .1.nr�s';l\., cor1d�lon� 1>r aucLl0!1 �·d: c;onveyai:�e. ��9�·T�:(·:::-,
··
Lcrms I� _(:ond,i1.hi1is nr-�n..,c:�i<>� ·�md. �on_vc�:,�u.,ce f:>t!ed do, �� proii�e·)i.�r-::.i
• elu 1J�rn 4'l·ileh• pui'mlLs/1�ron1blLi; ·th<: au<:uon purch�1stlr to r�c.e1ve p�yt'nC;li'Jt� · •. I.. , ..
_1wi1!r t�, p1•c·-lii1.mc�. nt f\,llUr!!_. �rnj!�(!lS. �ithm:1t.: obt�!ning_ � 11.cwp.�i�:or,t? ·
00 I
• It
.·.
• 1\ .i. t .... ,
rcgnilf!J.llcm _ fmin ·t�c! _90�

�r any Aulh_<>r-11.y._ l·lowcv,er,: f\a-u�e;ll?'<'��:�-:.
.,. conv�ya�cc:; Dcd1 prn_v1<�ci�.:.t!'at: lh� lcs�c,e· s�all, not, w1t�o�t ..s�·n�fl��!w� .. ·
pcrmrns1<:>n. in writll'1g or: �her prop�r Mun,mpal ·t>r oth(:r author.lty .cqn:<fem�� · . ••/
cr<:cl an�. ?upding �1: tli<: c:o·�m[m:ifll plot. · ··. � ·. ·· 1, ..
I .. • I I I 1.
'\
.
I •
REP�lES.OF O;;HER Ad$NCfE�-

• • ♦ I••
• .: ' . ;: 1 :
: I ..: \ •, � f I
• • • •t ,: � • � �• •
-D\ll'ing lhtl. CO\.lrnt:··. t;f. invt:sligattO\i' .nni.lce ��s: issur.a to. ,\i'chit�c:t, $h:'
Dip,mlrnr D\Jlli.� und reply c}f- tl;e ·su.mc was prc,vide� ufohg wi�h .Che f6P,y :iff
Cl>m:�:.rncd documents, <m \ 1 .07, 13. 1'ht: iume was an'alyz<id an� ,ft.:! h1· .. :·.
,,cirtinc:nt ·lQ 1nc:nLicm ri'crc lha� . the 1,rchitcct c,;m.pany ·. i,c..: C<iri�(!ltll'fg . · ·.
r�nginct:r\�·i'g Sbrviccs (lt'-lf,11�! -�t� lild, wat\ .UP.P<Jinted ns �r�Je?i:1u:chl�ii�t/of. · . ·
�ou:l.m�m cc,mmcrc1¥1 p·t.o�cic�·at pl<ll no l_3 A.,& 13 ,$ ,May�!' Vlh.ar:4:.�·�r.�:.
work which .was' . . <:oncluqc'd.. .in Ocl<>bcr .20 l 0: . Nothing .contrary. • · · t-o law wa�
: · . · l . I·· 1
observed <>1� the: part of cr�s. . · · . .� . ··: · ·. : · ·
.·.·x
. . . -;:.-: .. .. .- . . .
Ou,:�hg.,lh<: c:oursc <>f _i�,vc;stlgullon iiotil:o \\�ai; issue-cf to _,Jun�j·a�,f�cHr-fo.
Con:--uh.ants p;l l,td:and :rcp�y <>f'thc. samc:_w�1�:pr<�vlcl<id along with.-�t:�{,;py.
of ClH\<:<:rncd d_ocu mm1 ll-\ pn l 5.(,)7 •.13 �y. G�i.iw�h ,.Ju'n.<:ja, t;)tr-c:ctor. '¥.Hsi .�ftmc
•w�1s._.i)11·alyic�J. �_nd iL. _'3/as ftl\i'I'\� .lh�l Lli<; ·survice.· qf. · ,1�neja.::��-q��-
.. Coi1sull:�'.p1:�- wu� hiryd , \�y the :all�igti�- c:��pij,n¥ f<lr Jhe_ �t�ct��cl{ :�.: a.�1��:
· ; :_ · ·:.:
. I and ".:�r:I� _for. lh�. r.!<�Lcl. in:quc��!on. N.<>�h_mg·�o�t_rary, . lo law '\1/a�. �.bs�� r-9}P.1·
. • th1:p..irlof,lur'wJa1'cphn(tCcms1;1ltabt.s·. · ·._. ... ·1.'-'J� ,· :· ..
• l1 • • , •
��i.H'&!Af. . ·.
• , , • • • ' 1 ····'
6��in°g .·,.h·;: c:c,ur�,; iii. ln�e�llgflti<i1� _:nollt:c w�N is��.d- to·

• •
.
. Lit:t\11·�\n:� u1.1d 1.hn roply �wus provld�:d vip�· r-ln:. 36�y.3/ Aq�H.CP / 1j��1ni ..
dl.16.7,.1;'! and .. 377·39/jAd�-.CP/t;iccnslrig ·d�.. 13�7., 13 alo_ng "MitH. ··th�
M
phm11<:npic:i; or c:r.1:Lifi�alc r�:�!�Lr11lion of Ealing H1>��cs: giv.e#i� t��i4l�i�� ..'
�c!�ipuny . ·vl�c: ·�.<>.(I) ,It �I. l.u:. · No-8'1'1·!1,/.ADl�r,:CP / Ll9/2�:-l)_/67,l��y�'t ·· ·:
�•hc1r: · ��}_ l:;.H.l�w. N<H::'l'.HL/ADDL.C_�/'l._1-Cf.2�>1.1./68/,M�yu_r·.
E.1'1:1,H;.·No-�'l'H.L/AODL:�P/..,10/2011'1.l7!)/1':Ja'yur V!ha:r; '!4);-J�.. f,t-j�t��,,�: ::-·:· · '.·.
V;��fi,::::1m. " .
g1'HL/ Al)Dl,.CP/LIC/·201'.�/'�<i(,!Miiyu( . Viht,r. ·:'Ii lid··: .
(5).° ·:.:��,��;1 �.)i�� .... :·�
' ' •.
'•
. • ,·
,
• • • •
t •
. .
•
• " ·,
. •'
·. . ' •
'
••
' : • • '
•
•
:
•
!•
:•. ·:/il 1i,.-,!1i-nlr.f�c' ,
' •'
:r •--�'.. '. $� J; ��t
1• ::
.'; .'t ,I',•�'• ·I '
"\1•••�t•!'\u ,I�
' 1j'l'i'a,\•I
i• • :. • • · I••• , ,•
•
•
.
•
I
1
t
•
• •�• ,•, , •,jl\-t I�• ? I • . •. • • .-,• • ,
f; I ► 4
h
'. '•
t
. •' • . • • •'•• • •
'il'I j.;� JI
•
,1,�••r. • •.:,• •.
., •· , ...•. .•·· ·�·• �..,�• i:11�,lt •
:.i� }t•inf'-u,• !
•". ·.,.,,. ·,•.•!t- t
, · ···: ·... !
wiJ,.;: •
•
:.:.-:•·:;:�;i: . :>.i¥f1
..
I o o 't
I • I
: • .' I : ... ::� :�•;•
t J
t I e
! ·: .
. ....·
I : t
... '._ • .�rr.:{�'f.1ll.:ri.;•at1.� .. .
.
• t •• 4
..
..
.r
..
...
" I
• ... • 1 =· · · ri- • .. ,r-rrf f'ramrt�11rT
. ·1 ·
' . '• i:: �4;,· ' 134
.
·•, ' ,
��·i·1-11,ii\i>D1,:cP/LIC/,WI0/29J/Muy1.n·
: . ' ..
vi�1�,...
'rh,o .. fl.b.(')ve·· ,rep�y '��9: ·'if:�{ ·i ·.·
<1�;'i:.\1mr.Ms w6rn'a1)i1ly�\�d �ho 1191.hlng cc�n�l'\1-ry t<) la� \>.tall p'oserve�·-; ::... · :·• 'f. ,'· ·.
•
1,
·i ·
•
I I •
I
i•
. o·�r.inl{ •lhc: COLI��: of_\nYC$tigr2.l\on ':<i�iG�l W�i; '.�(c11,1cd . to. Oep�t� .r,l_�,1-\.)}, '.
t
•• • : • I •• •�:-;
omccr $h\1hdara S-oul·h Zom: {MCD), 'f.h<t As�maung 0m�er / lr.iC.l"llln;e,_iO /.� ·,
·
: .. ' l.ahi>i.lr. Gl�mmislli�mcr, Dii;tt, East., . The: Scc:rcla.ry, Oe.lhi : U.r.b¼nj.Af.::
· C!ommil<shm;. 'i'lie oy · Cl1ic�·F.in: Officer, t)�lh.i Fir� Servi��._. thc· �ss�C�.O�i;i \.
Manugc: (NOC), AER$) tNor�ijc�-n- R9gion) �"i�ports .. Au�:h�rit� _o� lndik,.�.��Ni: · �:
. (}a1,1_dhl 'Bhrli.oa.n,.'rhc Elcc.Ltinal 'ln�ptic:tor, •��<: lm,pcctor of l,1fcs_ and �pc: s �a(t :
of Lh<: 1dlc.g<:d 1:omr,�rny: •ri,c. re�hcs und tf}c doc1.1mcnts proY\dyQ• -� lry,e�
w��ri:-um>ly;-,d and i;c!'uUni�,ed an(j-11onc: c1r'thc.docum1,mt.r; wcr'efo�l,d to. oi. ·.. ··
fcir�(:d odals<: or. obl.�n<::� f:-av.9\llr.nlly. So �1c complainant� ,wer<;·C\i,li1(!(} b-q!L
I •
h,: failed �(l i)<>inl m.lt. rllid ld_cnlify lhc forgc:d' ()( falsr,· cl�)C�tn�nt� �nd'{furtl\er ..
· ·
- l-l:lU1,thL lime b1,11 nOl jo�ncd ilJve�lig�lion._ .... · :
·:�
1
.
..
.
I11l:, t ,,
: I
. �
I,
i
I
Ai�.
:----- .
V·,•. ·
I
I .·,
'I
l
I
I.
! .
l
I.
.· .
•i
. · .· . . .....
.. ..
... ::.,. .
'
... . . .: ..
; '·'
. ·.. . . ' .. , . ' ... :_ . � .t·. ::::.i: . /
6 .. l•:�rlicr lhti cqn11;imy �fJ�.h-�•vjng r.011�r�ct wl.1.1' l�l,iteC lnterc.�ntinent.��g:-i*R{- \
.·
· ro•bi·thor-_ in· lh<: ·bcu-� · (ntr.;�lSl e>f �the� ho��ls �nq __th_e�I' QP_�M�1�:-·��»iJ..:;: ... :_
135
Ml,lt\�.tgr.rn<!nl_ A�r�cmcnt <>f the Comp�my wd�· &'!'f1tchc� ov.cr Fr?f" ! ·· · · �1�t-
.-
·
lnLcrc;o1i11n<!n��l O'.·oup �o �.�<:. rp_H.on �orl�w.i��-- ��-d- "prq�e�ity._ twci1�'t1if�f -� . ·. •,_.
Dnubk: 1�rnc and li1lwn o� 1-11_\lo_n grb�P,. a. 5 stf�r bl':3,l)d, Is being �l,l�. c.:lf.'.�Ci,�•_i}
lhc i'>l<ILS, . . . .· ·• . •. , : ; ; •,:;;1 �: )
··
· -7.. ·Thc_cniu�li.ny ��tll r cfund l�!: <:�'.n<!st.. mo noy :as p�r-�he_ te. r ms a�(! c� .1dtil�ft'.. : : · · · · ·
1>f"'1.hc �\/(rClCmcnl. \l:'llho\,ll nny, IJ?lC:r��l ,C>i' fl'rl.Y c:ompcp,sat!<>t1 or' "'!�a,�cv,ri:-; I\ ::
1
1uiiurc. ·. , ·. · · · · ·l. ·r.

... ·. . . ' . �· . t' . • I • • • f
·
COU.�T-MA'r't,$R$ . ·. ·. , ·" · .
. 1'hcrrc ar<:, 1.<>,lat, 5 .mallc�i'� p,cnding/dispps't:tl •<>ff. in the C()\lTCS .rela.efr1g � ,
-.. . ... � ·'.
lhc: prcsmil CfHW: Th.c:y .•1rc as follows:•

• 1
.. .• I •:".•' 091
l. OM_l:i ·NoJ>a7/201\ fil�d:by.th<: allc�c-�·�ompariy i�.tl:1e D�lhA�j�:- · .

,Court. aga.i1isl DDA ·c.httll<:nglng ill\ ordt:r<>f forfeiture Clf.13ank Guarantqe �·qa.
· im dated' B, 11.11 �he DHC rr.rem:d lhc: rrmlL�:r co Arol.cratof, 'the·
t
handcd·ovcr to �h·<:· ArbilralCl1· s·h, Anll Pcv.-§lngh, Rld: J\ld�e-, 'OH�· ��:1•s
'ii� : 11arr+
pending .hcarlng. vi dc �9· AA 11o.3�6/ n an<.i 3i7 /1. 1 and,.t he··nei.t a'.�tc 1of
hc,1ringis.06,0<3;13. : · · · : ·:\•:-,•�·
2, ·, C� N;i. �19/10 mc:,d ·by •Ra.c.h na. A.�ora··.i11 the �e>nsumc;r c�>ur�-��,j{r��·t ,•• •·· ,.
1
· ·
�ro� �ind·lhci same: �as d.1smls�ed cm 09.i.)4.2€>13.. : . · : , .. · ...
3. ·Crl.'M.C. N�>.763/12 nlcd, by.�hc: 1;;1legd_d comptny for quashi-'1g/rr the
pr�5f\nl �H� Nll,'245/ 11, ,lhc i;_a.mc waR qU{Hi�Hid <ln 26.Q8. t� "Jtith·a �h'.',Q,�tldi:1 •.:
1·
·
t.hlll ql,!a!ihlng or t�ls F.tR shall �t;>t. ln a..nr �11.nner' aff(?ct th� p·a·se ofarit ·:
· other �q,,npl�int pend\l)g wtth. the p.oltce and tQf? poUce $h1\;U '·o,o'• a,f ··
, ·1�.t,-� lib.HtY tc;i ta.k� apprQpr-(�te action in s.ccord.anoe:wi.tl_i law:·::.···· ··1 '\ :
4. <.!C.:•. Nn: i(:(�·/1 /1"1\.W�:d by 8ml: �n.chnH krora;' im which ·the,pf��--�
. c�t1sc was rcgislcrcd. 'l'h<; iicx( date of h,;:aring-is' 16,0.9.13 anQ the <;?Oy)'� -��d. · ..
· · ordcl'ctj.:t\dilc l�dinal _rr.port. . . ·· . . · · ·.. : _:, ·:� .•.'):. • ·, · . · ,. ·
. ·5. c� (PS} ,P49/ 13 filed, by Srnt. Rt1cihna:,\rur�r.·ag,1il,s� �ros in .c�:.o{�n':l�I$-�.
.:. ··<;oyrt,'!�li,�nc:_xl�ffl<!Clf, h !??�i,:ig!sp�.12.IJ,·.·: .. ; :�,:i:/:�fl··.·.
··. ' ·: -�)n the basis �>f..tli<:·.ii:� 1;11r, laints rc:c:eivccl ·:fo· far a.rid_.t;;_:i�;J�]ti�i . ·
. , c;otid�(:l5:d·.tilt· ;)<;)YJ lhc �claltot ullegation and lhe in��stieti�i!i�•:'.vitil!!en . : · : ....
prt•.par<!�-ln tabular- form, wliich fl� m·en.Uoncd a� t.tnder : : .. ·. · .-::.-.. ·.:,� \ii.:�lf. ·:
,. :\• • ' • I· ,,. "\l• •
· · . .'
: .· -. '1 'fn'vcsllgatiun .... �... : ·· , _,...,�-i:ti:ri\ r,·· , .
•
!SJ,. i•Ah C!gfJL'ion · .

.J
I I. : • \ •• : •
r .' • , · .
• •
• I • • • • •••• •"I '"·' ' ... ' I I
. - .· ... ·: .
• • .. ....
Ne) : ·i . • • -·�r:i:· • I ;
• I
' • •• , .. ,
!l'
t
'} 1 \• •
w • ',: ,,
. ..- ..·.. . .- .. - � __, .. :.;'.�i�f�l�· i9.: ·.· : . · · ·

i
, . -�: xl M.,�� . ·-.�
. , �;�1;•
I ' I
• • • • : of �� Ji
1
1 .-.' 11, I ii
,:, 1. ,', .
.• �•,•;�
... .., !·:i
• :! J ..
l<
., ·�,.,,.
f•
t,,
•• • I
.... It-
' ..
I•
. ' '
• •• I
....
. . ..
•• , " 111
' •• I .. ·., . 'r•
.
r•
. ' 1 :, : ·1 • • .•.
I
. . .. • t
••• ••
. .
'.'
280
' '
'
136
.. . . . .. ; ..
'. •·
i'
II
·
I•
!· ·. .;)
.. . , Il
i
i
,.�t
I l�\.11
.. oi: th;f'r�• c:,�r�:ii�h\n�11�d�.\6-.:Pij1ftft· .
I '· . -:ri. ;rt .. cm1,1oj,�,.
,.,, all<�gc:d company �ave , e1thc:r, .any. .�rong · ce'.�1Iic,at�-i fA�f ;, ,.,t ·
I
w·ri>.ng_ �rndcrl�-Jldryg and l idet'11,iljin_g· ,the 8a1�1�.·.1'.P_f!:.-?'oc�:�:N�J::_l\.;\--· ·. �- .
· <:ati;. . . , . •.,' .• Il moa
.;. cc:r.lili . with l.�tl ·c9�p1amts,_ -�1�h ·1��r:' ::·, .;··: . . I
rcpllc:s were s<:r.utinlzt)d �.ut. np-�1 11�•�-··i_,_i •·
1
·1 wrung wa!4 c,b�<:rve?· The '!i�.cym�n\� � · :_ . =••..•

.
I ·. l w'liic:h were round rnsued-/e�c�t9� by,. - •

i . '·•'· ... t· �he 11llcgc:i;l com'p\¾ny are agt,'<:c:n\1e.,n 1, : �
j.
1
tOl,Cl m'.l:.Hmihip rorroJ �aymerit: pla:n,.rc1n�; ·

'
1
j . .'·1.<:or,rcsp�·n.�(l(ir.e ... betw e'!-!n·· ; Che . . ...

1
I'
�. -: ·:·••••
'•
c,omp\ain�-�1l.s �n�. t'J:i.�,.�.B��,_;_,__"_:{ ........: ·.

'i
1
i· ,;· ·. .· : : . · _ ,. . I
._ i 2 · · '.· Thif Govr.rni:ncnt.: agcn•;1cs 1;A n�>LH:C' •u 7 � �Jl / 1 -er, p,c, h�� qctq·, .· . �?
i 1 : i�suc:d w�(mg/false· l�s.ucd Lq YrHL<>U� (�ovr., ager1c1�� Jiind. :
I· j
1
.., :. · ii' <lr.u.�qnt�;· .Tpc sap-1e: �crq .ana\�ic�· : · •· ·
c:r.rLin(:ULC Lhcy ,SLlpp,llcd t<lplics a.long w1rh-.jlh<!·• . , .
. . ·I
., · : ·. ",.
..
' ..
'.... · �nd l; was fo.t:,�d:,.th�t _ the. ?,<>C\Jil)<fh�s:. 1 • ;

: . pc:1•rJ:!1n'�. ltl. l})SP._cqiwrt re�O!'C,. NQ� i. ,••'
ccrtlqc:�tr., · · : �ll�ment ·. !e�ter,.•.t ·
·.'
'· .
. land <:on'v<iyahc:t: deed", etc. on; verlficu lr>n , .
I
.scr'1.1liny ·lie> document� . 4:;f : . •. · · · •

I
.,j
i
I
... :. · · rouncl lo · be .'forged, or ra.9.rrca.te. *r
: . , : Ta:Jsc. 1'hr. cc,Jnplain�nts.were. c;aUc. 'tc.t � • .
@.. · , ·idm,1.iry wt<}ng/(ulsc �cr�lflc�tsc· '..\.l� .
I
...
�T ;. ·. : . · . . -thcY. r,1 ilcd w· do so. . -· .......: :� .: .: ... :: •... · .. · . ·,

• :i The ;,1C:i:1rni:d ·corrip,sn,v g()_ l . ·-rnp lond.: w�1 s. found ·l0. be: purchasHq
· . 1�c1 '_-Jand in •cl very r:h�ap I in _or,1:n ,1uction mid ii. wa� _fo u�cl: �lirJ� ·;..
; r;.tl�:·, on �<t pr�:ll:>:l c1r .C.WG Lhc cc>rnp_mi,v paid 1:�s.. Z36 Cr._ (_�J 8·p:c: ·. ·.
; •
'I
1
! , !,(mnc:s 29 IO . • .- for nac:h 1�lols. ag�m�t r.esc:rv.c:cP:P�lr:;¢.': .

i
·.. . . .- ·· - I <>.f r�s. r 1 1.• 9,7 cr . .. f.qr .�1!.�h..P.!Qt��,..::.:1-\,:� : : ·

., .4 The, r:ompai,�• W(·IS )w�nd• lo Th? r:oi:rrimy il°ppli<:d · for �a.nc·c�,i� .��t ,, ',
cfo,;,cil)p Lhc ·lfrnd· .prwr lcl II burld1ng phrn Oh 05.,•12,06 an� ·g(}.t m;f
' · ·. CWG.bul ;!· fai!�d to do i;o �u-ildi�g µ,la� sanct,iqned:0�, l�·::99:�'-\ �-
!
· • •. • • 1 1 htm it .�n�m appl!ed fol' .�ev,��tL:-
I
: �H1 '
,I
I. i. . · plun,.a�d:)tic s_a�,c:was,,apprc�� q1f ·

. 15.12.2008 · and the ..cont).rnf . i
I
·,
i
c>blain,:d ·J.'l'U, in Se.pt:;�tr+�·an�:sf f tlk. .
' gc>l �he ; C()tnplc:llmr -�.rtiJidctti:1,r s ..1H ·: .. . •
1· ..
I
·,· ! Dr.c:,?.0101 ¥orcc>,ve r ,lf.;�.a&,·.•@B,.�ij, ·: · "• ·· ·1

. . men Llpn�q hi.,the agreem��:-!'t-s�_f�;t ,ijl . ,
I i
• : Urn cortipanY, would
:i r-· if• · ·. · ·· : · · 1
@ ' . : io.v��t
•
,., · $ ; I
1
1· l- i pomws�icm rr<>rn ·' 30 ��o/l��l� ·

1
••
ti+=.t,:,: l ·. . · . . ....·. 1 .chllc c>r·appr.o,v_alJ1.f.:�h'�-�Lt�•·:'fa i�A:�iL - · · ·)

'.. ' 1 s · · 'l'jt c: �:.c>�1puny, . ·_uvaJled l''i'l\c: · rc:ply f��m· · DP/.\ -._:a,··
i
r • ·: i;� vorul - · . !:icnr.r_1li,;, . rroh1.I ug�i1<:1_ .1!s W<:rc. scru.{lnize:4•-: : ti· . ·:. • II
.:
: "�.
I
. ,.
: ,vt1r_ious · . · .
.•
I q
<.i1w�mip1cn found UiHL, hp .�t.!9.h.:);),:e'·' : , � ·
.. . .....
I
i
.' . ,.
. .. . .
.. .. .
., . . . . .. . •.,•..., ,: .i ,•·. .
:! - . .
• ... .
,
'
..... ...•
.. Ii• •
,I • I •
••
•
•,· J •
�
. .
f
1
.. ,
I
,•,
I •
I
I • .'
137
..
•••
'•
:��"1,
.1
·! I•
. I •
\ ,.
JJ
�. . ·. .
I
...
,, .
.
•' •
.. . '
..,__;·
.'
1 • '·
. . . ..
�rTnJijfilTimm1. n.
,
:"
, ... -� · 1:· · ···>:···: ,� . ..
ti' 11 U 111 '-'.II"'
,, I
1 ' I
138
...
• I •
·. · ·. Lht:n:by lhc
· u ppr<>
V!!cl
· , f'•
!!·
: :
i"·
..
.. ..· 1·
t ...
�- ·l
r,
... .....
.I
C •
I.
I.
C
I ..
i
,.
. ... •
1
'
I
t
:
� . .
I
I
,I ' ,.
i
• I
,.
l i
'
.
!
if
I
· ..
( ·,
·
139
. 1-
. "i.�,-....
\
.
•
.
.• . I ..•• :'t.1-<J
'
. ·1
1·
•• ,II
•,. 'I I
... .
',,
. ..·
••!
' .. . . ' , ..
• I
. •. .
' . . . ·.
•, .
·'.
, ..
' ... .J, ..,,.•
,· .· .
·. -i·
\.
. ... . , .. ,.
..
I
' t, .
•
. ,
t •t
..
I
. .
. · . ..
,·•
'•
I • •
, .
." . . ..
o C\l I
·:1f ..�-. n'ITT'!l\ijl \l\[.'
tr• "II' 11 1 I '.,,,.. I · I ,. I
J
140
.. .
-·
. '
...
. , .: .
·. ..
. ·1.
,.•
·1�.t,·". .
., .
.q
i-
f
•
!
. . ·, .
• I
. .•..
:
I
I.
.,...
141
I
·- I •
t.
·� .
I . ..· .
1·
'f.�·i·-
' •• 1 •
.
I
I
jI.. .
1·
I.
,..
Ht :· Dispi11.chcd ! ;
·: on
! •
•,•
:\..._.
I.
I.
. I•'
I .
1·
� orficct In Charge
t�i. ,·,�
.
.. Rank
. �(),
: PIS Nn,
. •t
•'H
I • ,.
.•.·.
-...
-
.
.J
.. ..
.
i i . '...
.. . : i ..
' •:
Annexure - F 142
FIR.No, 245/11
PS-EOW
Stale vs. Cancellation
20,03.2014
Pcesent: Sh. Gnurav Singh, APP for.{Hc-Stnte,
Proxy counsel' for accused persons (four in number, who
approached to High Court). · : :·
Other victims•Mr. S11r11s Ku'rnar .�nd As!1Hh Kumar with counsel
Shd R.P. Kasana.
IO Inspector N ,K. Jha.
0 It is obs�rved that High Couct of Delhi, Vide order dated 29.08.2013,
.,
was pleased to quasi\• ilie present FJR No. 245/11 P.S. BOW nnd at the same
time made it clear tlfot quashing of th.is FIR shall not in any m1111ner affect the
c;ase of other complaioants pending" w11h tli� police and police shall be at
·liberty to ta.1<e appropriate action in �ccordance with law. It is evident that
Cllllcollnlion report was. fili;d in the Court or. 16.09.2013, In such
circumstances, IO failed to give explllnntion as to how the cimcellation report
in respect of same FIR was filed nfter the said order passed by High Court.
, Vide said guash!ng order, all the criminal proceeding9,emanating from FIR No.
245111 were ordered to be terminated. In such circuinsta11ces, ro com.nutted
irregylarity in filing present cancellation reporL When no FlR \1-!ia'COJlii.C:qUent_
o en �
· · n of filing_ �Y. r o in
crm�_!!I P�OCf.eding& .were in existence,, the q· uesti
r�pCflt of said FIR does notarlse,
• Io view of above, present case stands closed, as per High Court •
·ord�r,·Furth�r; it js mad�.cl�aLthat 19 would b� at lib�rt:y to deal with
COtlljloints made by MrtS�,ai.-Kumar Md.Mr: Ashish Kumar independently
ond lake 11ppropriete action in accordance with law, � direcied by High Court.
0 File be consi:;ncd to recor� room. �·
0 Cv!Vm��UUA)
ChlefMetropeUt� Magistrate (South)
et Courts, New Delhi/20.03,2014
Annexure - G(Colly) 143
Arguments h�ard on application u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. In thi�

application, the complainant has levelled interalia following allegations: ,' �-' ·
·
.
; false commitment were made to attract bona fide
► single project.was s11b,divided into two projects arbi
inv ;-
ily; �
t
o
--- r , , · ' ·:-�-
· .
.
.. ·
► . -no brand outlet or five star hetel has been associated with the
project as promised;
0 No ·Jqtl jRJ�·ftojfbw ► · property was sold to different investors at different · rates and
t4 1 -I.') -.2.o {. lf
basic sale price was re<luced to- induce the complainant to deposit
the cash amount;
► plan of construction existing is completely different from what
was assured;
► completion certificates were obtained by accused persons
fraudulently from diff6{ent department prior to inauguratioi:ii�¾
Comrnon Wealth Garnes, though projects were incomplete at tMt{
time and thus �overnment and. banks were cheat�d by availliitg
subsidies and other benefit�;
► accused persons, in collusion with officials of (-ODA, _g.ot
allotment of both the plots at much lower rate from the reseiwe@'
· , - l·
auction price.
�
Police report was filed to the effect that allegations mentioned ini�lris.
·
co__pplaint ai"e similar to case FiR No. 24�l11, es,
BOW in which·�;ncelld1li:eJr�� -
0 re.l?ort was filed after Quashing of proceedings by ljigh Cnur.t
: . .. . ___ . ·�:
�/
It is observed that proceedings of case FIR No. 245/11, P. .S. BOW ./:
were-closed by this Court in view of quashing order dated_J,9.08.2013 passed ,1
by High Court and it is noteworthy that while quashing proceedings, theO.lliglti
Court made it clear that the quashing of proceedings -in· that case would not \V.-,�;
\
Ii
affect the case of other complainant and police would be at liberty to take : '
I
. ------ ,. . - .
If r I
'�""'-
•...,.,..;1- - . 'I. j;.
144
.. 2..
-
appl·opriate action "in accordance with law. Further, it is noteworthy
.
.. ---- - quashing order wa,s passed in that case on the basis of settlement betwe
parties and not on the basis of merits of the case.
Facts mentioned in the present complaint; prima facie, di
commission of cognizable offences. Accordingly, SHO, PS-EOW, is directe
register an FIR on the basis of complaint of complainant a.......,"""'-""'"-"'-==�-
- -- - · .. ··
�hvestigation g_y next d�ts, of be.ru;iiig,.·--
'
Put up for report on 12.09.Z014. IO shall appear in person· with
:police file on date fixed. � -,
-- ...,.... -,
Copy of order be sent to PS-EOW'in1mediately for compliance.
0 ---s:..J-
-.:::::---
(VIVEK KUMAR GULIA)
Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (South)
Saket C0urts, New Delhi/09.07.2014 I
Chief Metropolitan Magistrate f�th)
Saket Courts COffiJ/6';( .
NewDalhi
0
145
1:: msT INFORMATION REPORT
CIPA-R1.11 OD (Under Section 154 Cr.P.C.)
QI I Olslrlcl: Crunc & P.S� ECONOMIC OFFENCES

Vcar.• 2 0 I 4
FIR No,:
Railway WING 80
2. Acl[s): Socllcn[s):
.J
(1) !PC 1860 406/407/415/420/467/468/47 1/109/l 20B/34
·-: ,,
(ii)
(1h)
(IV)
3. Occurron co of Ollcnco:
(a) Dny. Wednesday Dale From: 28-03-2007 Dalo To! 28-07-2014
Time Period: Time From: T1m0To:
{b) Information recoivi,d at P,S: Dato: 28-07-2014 Timo: 14:30 hr�
(c) General 0inry Roforonco: Entry No.: 22A Time: 14:30 hrs
4. Type of lnlorma\lon: WRITIEN
S Pl.ice of Oceurronco:
(al Direction and Distance from P,S: Boal No.:
(bl Address: S-1,AMERICAN Pl,AZA.INTERNATIONAL TRADE TOWER.NEHRU P!..i\CE, N.D.
(cl In case, Outside tho limit of the Police Station:
Name of P.S: orstrtct:
6. Complainanlllnformnnt:
{a) Name: VlRPAL SINGH AND MS REl!NA SINGH (S/0) LATE SH NARAYAN SINGH
0 (b) Da!O/Ycar of Birth:

(cl P.issporl No,
Natlonahly: INDIA
Date of Issue· Pince of Issue:
(d) OccupntI0n.
(cl Address: C-702. KA VER! APARTMENTS, ALAKHNANDA. NEW DELHl-1100I9.
7• Oo1nlls or Known/SuspccUUnknown nccusod with full pnrtlculars(allach soparato sheet 1f necessary} (5J
(SE!> ,\NNEXURE FOR ACCUSED l)UTA1LS}:
8. Reason for dolay in roporlmg by the complalnanUinformanl: NO DELAY

9, ParI1culars of 1hc proporUos stolon/lnvolvcd(attnch scparn.tc shoot If nocossnryl:
SI.Ne, Property Typo(Doscr1ptl0n) Est. Vnlue(Rs.) Status
(l)
(Ill
(111}
10 • Total valuo of proporty stolon:
11 • lnquost Rcport/U.D Caso No., ff any:
0
-1-
ff·r-- --�-
Vl,
- "I�:r..., �-·--
ATTSfi'"f'ED
l.._
i
J_ i1 B Ffr. 1�·} 1
�} �•• ,,.,,,,..,,.,., ..,u1,.. ,,.,,,.atnnrr,,1

EY.ammer....................... .
146
01s1r1c1 Crime & P.S: ECONOMIC OFFENCES FIR Onto: 28-07-
Yaar; 2014No.: 8 0
lldlh�.iy WING 2014
• 12, F.I.R Conlonls[aUach scparatcshcot,tl required): ✓ , ':"�-- <

/� • · ·•·-':,,,, •�,
\ 1;,· COURT OF CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE:, SAKET COURTS, NEW 1 / , _ • ..-·��:�3�
l·, I, COMt'LAINT CASE NO. OF 2014. COMPLAINT CASE NO. 0= 2014. IN /,:::; �.__/ (..
IH· MATTER OF: 1. VIru>AL SINGH S/o Late Sh. Narayan Singh. 2. Ms.
lll-.1•:N/\ SINGH W/o Sh. Virpal Singh Both R/o C-702, Kaveri \;
�:I. (:0
"'
":�I t=� \.�-�'t--fl;.;�...·\-§;ft_\'
---··;t.
1\parLments, Alakhnanda, New Delhi-110019 •• Complainants Versus. 1. \-� •�(9€'/l,,,."'i�/
' ,:i;i.':5!'- J,f.
M/s 1mos RESORTS & HOTELS PVT. LTD. THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR/$, 2. Mr. Cysou\11
SaLtsh Sood (Director). 3. Mr. Amit Rai Sood (Director). 4. Mr,
1�aman Sood (Director). 5. Hr. Sumit Sood (Director). All at:-s-1,
/\::-er i can Plaza, International Trade Tower, Nehru Place, Ne�, Delhi-
�·cc19 .•• ACCUSED/RESPONDENT. P.S. EOW (south). COMPLAINT UNDER
Si:: 1 IONS 190 (1) (C) OF Cr.P.C. READ WITH SECTION 200 c=.P.C. TO
:/\'<t IIIE CCGNIZANCE OF, OFFENCE COMMITTED UNDER SECTION
'.7�/�06/107 READ WITH SECTION 415/420/467/468/471 AND UNDER
5:·C 'C:-l J 09/120B/ 34 IPC, BESIDES THE PROVISIONS OF THE PREVENTION
O• �:OltlWPrION ACT ACCOMPANIED WITH APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 156
{:) Cr.P.C. MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOl1ETH: 1. That the present
::m·p I a 1 nt case is filed in respect of complaint filed i:t the
:;: ' CQ O! tCP/EOW cell vide dairy no. D-8517 dated 21.12.2013,·
wt· : ,:n · 1 s i r. reference to cheating and fraud in connection with the
01. r c:hase of shop by the complainants, who are husband and wife
-iil�·cly Virpal Singh & Reena SJ.ngh. Photocopy of said complaint is
ilr··mmd as Annexure-"A". 2. That both the above named, 0
,::;:no1ainant.s purchased shop No. B-208 {at the time of booking) in
.. re rr.a in Lc.bby, area measuring 585 sq., feet, 1·1hich was later-on
arb Lrarily changed by the accused persons with Shop No. B-54 area
mcasur�ng E20 sq. feet at Shopping Arcade, Eros Boulevard, Mayur
v1�ar DJ.strict Centre, Delhi from Eros Resorts & Hotels Pvt. Ltd.
,•hc:.oc:opy c,J: Shop Buyer Agreement dated 28.03.2007 is annexed as
A-�1:xurc "El". 3. That the accused persons i .e Directors, Managing
.: •c:c1.or/s, Employees and Agents have cheated the public at large
i)no specially to the complainants by deception and corroritted fraud
b\' misrepresentation thereby inducing the complainant to deliver
:.nc:m qieir hard earned money for booking a non existing Virtual
st•op by charging an exorbitant price of Rs. 26,000/- (Rupees
,wcr-Ly Six Thousand) per sq. feet by giving a false assurance
m,sc:d on a deceptive visual presentation in the form of Brochures,
:c: :;_red & Attractive Sir.e Plans, Photos and Computer graphics
c,rc.imr>Ltng it to be an attractiv�ly situated in the best of an
.,c;::mr. r:g Mall-cum-Five Star Hotels of Inter Continental
···.cir connected with an Atrium, Escalators, Nater Fall having
·' :.crnac. 1.ona l Standards, Photocopy of coloured site plans is
�.-11 ...... ,., __ .. ····-- ,.,. JI .,..lo.. ...... : .... ......... -�---- .. .... \.,, ..., \.. ... ,. ____ ..., --
0
--2--
��mo-ITT
A1\� TSD
Ef
1 8 H6 ?J1 u
.,
� -,
147
.L
Fm No.:2O140O8O
\@l-
Dato:28
rJIUJl:!X.t!U d!:> lUllll:!X.UJ l;!-1. • •, • lJldt. .L" \'Id::. ::.uowll t.O lJt:! IJ�.L.L(a!Vl!U (l!> (l
;-oex1.st.ent structure of Twin Hotels with big water fo:lls in

• between shops in Lhe lobby area with state of class in looks & ,:
ambiance as existing in Dubai. and. further represented the s.:imc . ·:-'
1-1ould be having a very high ·prospective vaiue due to ils assured,
occupancy by Hotel Im:.ercontinental and assured completion b�I ore, • . ·· '•• .�.
.,,; ,_. ,, ;_;/.:
.,
the opening of the XIX Commonwealth Games, 2010 i.e. before
�=��
• ') • • • ... ✓
,.,;;:;c�- ! :.. •_ ,._4-
September 2010 and due to having scope of complete booking ol
hot:el rooms with foreign visitors during the said games ancl
Lherefore there will be good business opportunity since bcqinn1nq
due to having shop in b1.g lobby area on its main entrance. !I. I h,l L
accused company !a i I cd to complete their project within Um1 r
guaranteed pen.ad assured at the time of booking. The ac<:uscd
company and its d1roct.ors, officials and estate agents at.l.rilct.cd
the complainants to book a commercial shop i.e. Shop No. II ::>OB nf
585 sq. feet., in Pl at No. 13A presently arbitrarily shjJ Led 1.0 11·
5<1 on Lobby Level, at Shopping Arcade, Eros Boulevard, Milyur
Vihar, District Centre, Delhi by showing: a rosy picture lorc,nq
us to pay 5 times much higher price of Rs 26, 000/- (Rupees ·1 wen Ly
Six Thousand Only) per sq. feet, which is still not exisLing al Lor
passing of 7 years despite the fact that in the last 7 years value
of all the properties increased more then 10 times. 6. l'hal Lhc
undersigned complainants were kept in dark with respect to I.he
0�
approvals of the bullding plans from the government agencies and
no intimation of communications 1•1ere ever given from the ilCcuscd
company, its direcLors, officials and agents, in initial 1.wo years
ait.er receiving the amount for st.arLing of raft construct.ion �111.h
respect. t.o consLrucL.ion, status, building plans, comptet.1on &
branding of hole L chaJ.ns which was Lhe main essence of U1<: dc:a I .
I. That. the complainants had already made the payment oi Its.
1, 17, 96, 500/- (Rupees One Crore Seventeen Lac Ninety Six Thous,mds
and Five Hundred Only) to the accused company through chequc/s and
in cash also till date and detail of the same is as under: Sr.
Ch. Pass Date. Ch No. Amount. Made of payment.l, 03-01-?00/.
584915, 10,00,000/-, cheque. 2. 25-01-2007, 584916, 12,81,!>00/,
cheque. 3. 03-04-2007, 797241, 15,21,000/ cheque. 4. 10· 08 700/,
802748, 15,21,000/ cheque. 5. 07-06-2008, 811320, 7,60,!)000/
cheque. 6. Amount received in adjustment of rates 47,12,�00/
Tot:al 1,17,96,500/-. 8. The accused company, its director/s &
officl.als till date has clayed were tactfully with the
complainants and the he.1.ght and magnitude of cheating by 1.hc
accused company, it.s director/sand officials could be iudgcd lrom
chc fact that the accused company inspite of issuing tho rcccipL
oJ payment made by the complainants in cash for an amounL ol Hs.
'11,12,!>00/- {Rupees l?oi:-ty Seven Lac Twelve Thousand and 1-'ivc
Hundred Only) adjust:ed the same by showing the reduction ol Hs.
0 r. ... nn ,_ In t-h .. ,..,,, ,.., nr- npr C:n i:-...... i .. i'rn,n 'Fl<> ?f. nnn, ,,,,r
-3--
•.1
148
D:,.,str:,.ct Cruoc u a.,;,i,,c.y P.s. :ECO!IOflXC OFFEUCES 'fllllG Yaa::::2Di4 FIR No.:2D14008D Dntc:28
-, � ... �. • ... ..... _ ____ .,. __ -- �-- '""""1· ........... -·-· -----· ......... _..,, ... ._.....,, �--
::n, 'eel t.o Rs. 19,500/- per sq. feet and fraudulently receive<:' P
--
·•c:CJ<.
• amount by indulging t.hem in their nel and succeeded in tr.e.1.1.
h�,.�,-:: �,��
• �
h, oclcn object and avoided the receipt. of the amount received from /' '-, _ .. , ,.<:/">,�
"·�·LJ:'jl.: \·::.. �-\

I.he complainants. Photocopy of payments receipts are annexed as ,i ,, {'"�:;---:-::;
/\nnmrnre-"D" (Collectively). 9. That in the case of all other :
.
f.l..
� -
•zt
buyers the company has increased Basic Sale Price of other · ,;, :·- 1 ::.�1
• > ' _, r11,1 1
, "Vcs Lor s on the pretext of changing their Shop's No. , Area, ,
, ',/,"-• -�,.'·' I.'i,
-�,,;?/i
•.ocmL,on and also charged PLC (Preference Location Charges) £or '.:';'..,::;.,.. �
arb:Lrarily changing the shop's location according to its ��c�
convcnJence and in the case of complainants from whom the accused
company received an huge amount in cash has reduced the Basic Sale
l'r cc of the complainant's shop as mentioned above, and motivated
l.o :.h<l complainants and get them agreed for the same on the ill
mJv, lW q Lven by the representatives of the accused company ar:d
vt•'", cleverly reduced their liability on papers. Till tiling of
•• r:c c:�1minal Complaint against the accused company and its
'"t:cvcscm:atives the complainants felt it uncomfortable for
:.t·c:msc Ives due to having no receipt for the amount paid in cash
ancJ ad1usted by reduc1ng the Basic Sale Price by the accused
c:omp1my and its representatives and accused company al.so succeeded
•,. :.hci r cheating plans by accepting cash separately from its
c:,.s:.omcr /buyers by assuring that in case of making payment i:i cash
0
'.hey may generate passage to reduction of stamp duty and alsc
•HJ· V(:d off J.nterest and penalty part due to not making further
paymcmt.s on demand of the accused company despite the fact tl::at ,
il 1 ,.er first demand for raft the accused company failed to raise
anv demand for next two years as per its demand schedule fixed at
:.-ic time of agreement. In this way, almost all the investors
wc -- c:/are cheated by accused company and this was also the main
rc,rno--i tor the complainants for not coming ahead earlier or for
'Ill'. making complaint alongwith several other buyers despite the
I :ic:1. LhaL no one is still ready to accept purchased property
tlt:<:.iusc whole project of the company is failed due to not
·.: 1.l1ng the assurances made initially with its investors/buyers
a-it! presently its completely a failed project and accused conpany
, !l :lilving advantage of receiving huge payment in cash without
1:;s:..1ng any receipt to its investors/buyers. 10.'!'he accused J., •
c:>'"loany deliberately and intentionally shown the entrance of
I :)oOv' s shopping area from the front main road in its site p:an
ilnci il !so shown construction of two plots together despite the fact
t .. u,. Lnc accused company and its representatives �iere not in
<:•Wile: 1.y to construct the project as shown to the complainan.::s and
. c:� or, changed t.he plans and complainants J:ieen kept l.n dar·c
:lilLe anci did not. receive any communication about change of
o •J•,:; or 1.he reasons for changing of the plans. 11.That rnone.::ary
dc<r.anci of the accused company was met on time not onlv in th:..s
0
--4--
T .. -:·, ··-- -- �
�.;J.L -�• - �lj'"' "!' • ___ .__
149
n1 �t�1ct:C�il:I� £ Rnil.wny P.s.:ECONOMl:C oFEEHCES.W:tllG Year:2014 F.IR No.:20140000 nato:28
project. but in the other project of the same company i.e. ,JI. J,akc
\-Jood City, surajkund, Lakkarpur, Haryana, where the compJaimmLs
are also separately and jointly investor /buyer of two di 11 <ircmL
plots of area measuring 1100 sq. Yard and 500 Sq.··yard v1dc plo1.
no. 1\.-36 & C-52. 12. That. the accused company could not g I vc: any
clear picture of the project in the past and the construcL1on was
:-iot initiated for more then two years by the accused company
without any reason and arbitrarily lingered the project I ro:n I.he:
common Wealth Games as it was assured and presented at Lhc Ltmc ol
booking r.hat during Lhe games period there will be huge lorciqn
customers from all over the world besides the foreigners, w:10 will
st.ay in the sajd hve sLar hotels. 13. That as per Shop lluycr
Agreement, complet.ion of the project. was committed tot.ho
complainants within 30 months from the date of demand for
canst.ruction of Raft., which should be at least six months bolorc
Cammon l'lealth Games and there were several other verbal assurances
& cammitr.1ents committed by the accused company, its dircc1.or's and
officials regarding completion of the project well in advance as
they got the conditional allotment of land and in case oJ no·.
completing project within the stipulated period they will lose
lots of incentives from the hank & the government which amounLs Lo
big amount if the project will not be completed & operational
0 before Common wealt.h Games. 14.That the accused company availed
all t.he benefits by shot•ll.ng that the project completed be! ore
Common Wealth Games on papers with the active connivance of
offic lals of concerned departments, who issued wrong ccrL, f , C1lU!/s
& licenses t.o the accused company in order to faciliLaLc I.he:
accused company and Lt.s director & concerned otficials ,whc> arc
also co-accused and must be book under the Prevention of
Carruptl on Act and t.he director/s and offici�ls of accused c:ompany
are also liable to giving them bribe for availing false
certiticates. 15.1hc accused company has failed to geL any
international or reputed Hotel and Hotel Intercont1nent.al
- cancelled its agreement with the accused company due to us,nc;
inferior material ·and not completed project in accordance ol as
earlier shown on papers and promised period and the complainant.s
were/are not in posit.ion to cancel their agreement with Lhc:
accused company due Lo already paying huge amount and exccut. 111g
_one sJded agreemenL prepared by accused company and there w1is
dom1nat.ing posit.ion oi the accused company on its
J livest.ors/buyers·. 16 .1'haL the accused company intent.iona 1·1 y
misrepresented to attract. its customers at the time of bookinq.
The accused Company mJsled its customers as complainanLs by q1v1nt1
�he assurance oi tic-up �1ith big hotel chains and atlcr <ml 1cit:l.1n<;
0 huge amount from publlc accused company changed their Lit! ups by
frequently changjng the brands of hot.el chain i.e. Hotel
--5--
"o��\
.�W'
. ..,. -- - :-s:- ·-- -,
150
D,.,ita:,.:;t:1C.-a.m" C ltail.'11''1Y l?.S. :EC:ONOMI:C OFF;mc:;;:s 'RDlG Yau:2014 J;"l:R llo, :2D140DB0 Dat.c:28
I r.t.crcontinental, Hotel Crown Plazas, Hotel Holiday Inn and

prosonLly sonic infamous hotel is running i.e. Hotel Double Tr��
and Lhe entrance of the complainants which was earlier from the
front side on papers and presently its from the back side in
;:icLJality, which cannot generate good footfall as earlier
pr-o jected. 17. That all �1rongs committed by the accused company
0
c;c.rn� 1 n the knowledge of the complainants after going through in
clcLail from the contents of the FIR No. 245/2011, lodged in P.S. E.
o.w. by another buyer/investor namely Rachna Arora and the
ct·c11L i ng and fraud committed by the accused company, its
d1rccLor/s and officials with the complainants rs two steps extra
c1rd I.he complainants also have all the similar grievances and not
O�ly the complainants in-fact, all the investors & buyers are also
s•.I rarer due to ,wrongful conduct of the accused company and J.ts
ol r 1c;i11ls. The material facts mentioned ln the F.I.R. No.
,-�/?011, registered in P.S. E:O.W. cell may kindly be considered
n� parL of present complaint and same are not repeated for the
-;;ikc ot brevity and same is annexed as Anncxure- 11 0 11 • 18.That
�4rLicularly, in the Eros Boulevard, Mayur Vihar project of �he
'lccusod company, complainant's faith from the accused company
c:ompletely, disappeared when accused company failed to arrange the
1.crants or failed to let out or also failed to pay assured rent,
w;1lch was orally assured or committed at the time of _obtaining
siqnatures of the complainants on the well drafted N.O.C. by the
acc:uscd company, which was obtained by g1ving further false
;ls1wrances by the accused company, its d1rector/s and officials to
qivc IL before the E.O.\·J. Cell in the abovementioned F. I.R. lodged
il•Jill nsl the accused company. 19. That as per knowledge of the
t·:mp I ai nants accused company and its dirl:!cLors approached c.o
0
l.:>n'blc High Court and sought the quashing of said FIR whereby tn
\rl M.C. No. 763/2012 the accused company and its directors
�:01.t.lcd their matter with the several complainants and as per
final order dated 29,08,2013 Hon'ble High Court observed that the
accused company and its directors sealed lheir matter �1ith 9 other
nvosLors/buyers by reimbursing their amount with �nterest and
110,'bJe High court also levied cost of.Rs. 4,00,000/-(Rupees Four
la= Only) for quashing the proceedings against the petitioners
:Directors of Company) in order to maintain the peace in the
�0�10Ly. It further transpired from the order dated 29.08.2013
this quashing order shall not affect on the easels of any
1nvestor/s or buyers. Copy of Hon'ble High court's Order
29.08.2013 is annexed for the kind perusal of this Hon'hle
-
_..,...,r-,-:::::;::;;'.fi��•rr1.�aa- 1\nnexure-"F . 20.That from the perusal of F.I,R.
n
$- ,�- _ 1sLe d against company and High Cour1.'s Order dated

/\.,-,:r:::-3·ptt,.\)].?o 3, its clearly transpired that lhc accused company and
] • ' ,_ Ls of f1< ials committed several ,�rongs and l.herefore, accused
... r.,.-..
"-1 L r •is
\ --6--
�
. \-::�. ·=·:·�� ::. $��-- : T'

151
.L
�l>,
l)utr..et:Cric,o i; ru.o.i,u,y e.s.:ECOllO!iXO OFF.E:lle&S_ RDlG . Vco.::201.4
. Fnt No.:201AOOB0 \o.l:c,:28
'.· . ::· ,,::::- �·. :��
l
. ;-.
compan�· reimbursed I.lie amounL rece1ved 1oJ1th interest. LC 1L:-1 -�-� ·.-·':i •••."\.'·�,
.:everal 1.nvest.ors and undersigned com plaJ.nants are alsc 1nnocent. 11:j'- · ....._ · {-.\
---
victJ ms of accused company and its officials and the ccmp I ,11 m:rnLj
I:,.
�
**
••
'i .: , :-
, ... )
0�
:,oL only invested wJ Lh the accused persons b\lt also due Lo • "" ( • . I,. ,
believing on the words ot the �epresentat'ive ·of the accused i��- CJ •~ /.\· '\;•
company that they wi 11 certainly either refund the amounl or Lhll �: ,.. v J17,i�:� \ · ,l��•
j sh i n q Lhci '11·,q,.
..en� <'.,,;.
�
p
com lainants with approp riate interest ust after finj
p
cnmJnal matter pendlng aga1nst them or they will com ens.il.t: I.he:
complajnants by provld:rng or arrang1ng permanent occupicr/L<inanL
who will pay at least rent to the complainants Rs. 175/ t.o Hs.
225/- per sq. feet and accused company and its represer.LaLivc
further requested to co-operate by signing on the NOC �ra,Lccl by
accused persons. 21. 'l'hat after believing on the words of 1Jc:c:usc:cl
persons the compla�nants. s1gned on the reply/N.o.c. alrclldV
prepared by the oJ Uctals of the accused company and also due: l.l>
having other money on stake invested in accused company's cl.heir
proJect, possess1.on oi which was also pending at that. st.aqo and
received few days back, which was kept on hold by the ol r ic:ials of
accused company J.n order to pressurize the complainants to
rest.rain themselves to be part or party of earlier invest. 1'}ill.i on
pending against them. 22.That from the contents of already
registered FIR, the complainants have came to know that t.hc.
accused company, its directors, officials and associated persons
0 nave further cheated the Government, Department, firsl-Y by

get.ting allotment of land by manipulating officials of D.D.A. and
�hereaLter, by availLng several benefits under the beneficial
schemes declared by Lhe Government of India in order to p'omol.c
'..he XIX Commonweallh Games, 2010 by traudulently showing .he
j1ncomplete) project. as l'unctional prior to Common Nea Lh Cr1mcs 1.
con 03.10.2011. This act. of Lhe accused company was/is port or
t.he maJor conspiracy linked t.o Lhc Common t•lealth scam s i n..:c: t.tm
date. of having allotment oi two different plots and show,nq 1L
combined project and accused company is habitual oftender ol do1nq
such offence in order to attract the investors and col .. cc·.cd money
from the public at large and accused company and its
representative , ofticials are habitual offender and chea .Cd I.Im
compla1.nants in a preplan manner. 23.That the complainanLs hav<l
.been mislead . by the accused company with an intention Lo caus<!
wrong.ful gain to themselves and wrongful loss to the compJn I nimL:-i.
'J he complainants have been cheated and induced to pay an nmounl. or
Rs. 1,]7,96,500/ cnupecs One crore seventeen Lac Ninel.y s,x
Thousands and Five Hundred Only) to the accused company and , 1.s
oificials, on the1r !alse assurances and promises. 21.'.hil. tho
Lalse and m1.slcadinq representation by the accused coll"pany, 11.s
director/s, o:l:fJ.ciaJs is present.Ly well proved f:rom t.he o'dcrs of
0
ilon'blo High Court. 'J'hc above mentioned cheating & 1;raud by way or
--7-
,1 0 FH. FJ!l
.....=�--
152
.. " - ':..1ll---
?);i.:1t.r1ct. Cr.u:10 & Rn1J.vay P .. S. •l:coiioMXC: O!".FENCES 'WING Yan::2014 Ji":IR Na .. :20140080 l>.n.te.::2.B
7 7 �-,,...__
ia:c:cmt.1 ons n�ve .oee? �racci ea on t.?e ompJ.ainam:.s oy cne accusea ,.-: _ ,.:.,,;�
. /. �
.::::r-pany and its offJ.cJ.als since begJ.nning of the transaction a� i /" ,.. - �-·;.• �,,;�'\.
t.t:.c I nLent and design is very well evident from the conduct of I t./1_7 / �
•/ )t
%, -&��
acc:uscd persons if the complainants knew at the time, of I/,: { : �!}:
1 n<luccment that there are two different plots and coul.d not be \� \� ; \ ' . �� _. ,� , Ji
1:onsLructed together as projected by the accused company and pla�t.,
_
*�1 ;:,...:.;..-�!
st>own Lo them are not sanctioned and they were selling space i.e. '�':_:1_,.__�::.:,·�-�,S"Si',/'
'lonc:x i stent shops to the customers by committing false assurances �
and collecting money. 25.That presently it's well established and
o� record that the accused company and its representatives have
nee .. cheated similarly to its all the investors and the persons
wrn t.ook I.he stand of making complaints against the accused
c:c:'I n/Jn\' succeeded to get their money back and the undersigned
::c,rr.p I a I nant.s were made fool by the company by giving false
�ss�rances and the complainants restrains themselves earlier after
oc: 1 <iv 1 ng on the false assurances made by the accused company a:-:.d
1 :.s persons and also due to not issuing receipt by the accused
::orr.pa�y ror the amount received in cash by the accused company and
:1 ,s I.he fault of the company who intentionally and malafidely
no .. issued the receipt to the complainants and indulged the
::o•rnlaJnants by motivating them to made payment in cash and
rcc:uccd the Basic Sale Price in the manner as already mentioned
above 1n detail. 26.That the Complainants therefore given a
::�im1nal complaint to register a F.I.R. in E.O.W. and requested to
nvcsL1gate thoroughly about the allegations made in their
GOIT'pla1nt and proceed in accordance with the law by bringing the
0
•J<:c:,,sc:d company and its director, officials, associates to book in
::r on I nil I case, who have cheated the complainants and extracted
t.i-c; · r hard earned money. 2 '7. That the accused persons dishonestly
, nciuccd the complainants and other investors/buyers to part with
!.he: L substantial huge amount and the accused company deliberately
nnc! dishonest:ly failed to disclose the real facts to the
c:cr:pl a inants regarding the affairs/dealings of the company as the
accused company's representative knew that the complainant would
no. 1'ilvc parted with the huge amount. Thus the accused persons
hilv<: committed offences u/s 406/407 I.P.C. read with section
t.1:i/'1?0/109/120-B/34 I.P.C. besides the offences committed under
1.nc: prcvent1on of corruption acts by the Govt. Officials, as
spc:<:1 f 1cillly alleged and mentioned in earlier FIR against the
c:umpany. 28. That the said accused company and its directors made
',J �:e doclarations with the complainants and other buyers and also
•· �:nvcrnment offices with the help of Govt. Officials., thus the
'.1«• comp I eLion certificates from the several government
<i<.::;,r1.mcnLs were obtained by the accused company. The accused
persons have thereby committed the offence with the active
0
connivance of Govt. Officials and made wx-ong representations
ht,I ,,.,,......, t-ho ril'\n_,..a.,..no..-1 l"'fcrt�'l""'+mant- ic; ; r, nrno.,.. f-1'\ rrot,- c-auaT"'.::i1 hcno-F-iro
--8--
�-=-
153
_..,!: __ .. .
D:,,:,tr�ct:CriDc & R<li.l>:1>.y P,S,;ECONOMJ:C OFF&NCl::;5 RIN�.· .::tcllr :20l4 FIR lla.:201.40080
\8>
Dntc:28
,..'-'t""""..._ ..., ...""-...... , U· ..... :. ,.,;�-"'".._ """'""' ":t'-'"" ...a""'"'_.. ... ...'-••� • '-;:!:,: �;::-:- ""::-
,.-=:.:: •,;..·.:\.�
...,.._.,....,.. ..,. .... �•'-' ....,v••'-'""".._ ...._._.. 1
but failed to fuliil.l their obligation tm�ards the bona= de: ,-.-:·: •• · , ...�
buyers, which has created valuable legal rights in their r avo 1 _.1;1hd
the same is "Valuable Security�, within �he meaning of scc1.1 f1.1)F! "I , y,1.v,
!fC. Hence, these persons have also committed the offer.cc 'o ( �\
"Forgery of Valuable Security", punishable U/s 467 Il?C. 1-urL t#,�:-.., 1 • ) /- ,s
' }�
f
*1
the accused company have created the above mentioned M.O.C. I t.4°••,•,./1�. :-:_{,i,:'c.
ci 'J?)
;;:,
Lhe purpose of saving itself and its directors and repeaLcdly �--� e�
cheai:ed i:o the complainants, thus the accused persons commi Ll.cd
Lhe offence of "Forgery for the purpose of cheating'', pur,shablci
C/s 468 TPC. FLrLher as they used the wrong declarat.Jons os
genuine, thereby they committed the offence of "using " l'orqcd
Document. as Ger.uine", punishable U/s 471 IPC. 29. Furthc�, as all
the above mentioned accused persons are connived with eilch oLhcr
in furtherance of their common intention of their all a�d Lhcy all
induced the conplainants to pay them and caused the compla1nanLs a
huge �1rongful :oss of their valuable amount. 30. Thus, i:. ls clear
that: accused company, it.s directors, officials and its several
office bearers, professional advisers and officials of Govl,
Departmerns acted 1n connivance with each other in order Lo
provide undue advantage to the accused company and acted! aqainsl
the bonafide buyers/investors and having their hands 1� same
glove, thus, they all committed the offence of Criminal C:onsp1rncy
0
beside the Cheat1ng & Fraud with bonafide purchasers. 31. lhilL 11.
JS evident fro� t.he above mentioned facts and circumsta�ccs LhaL
the accused persons jn collusion and connivance with er.:=:-i 01.hcr,
deliberately malai;dly and dishonestly, misappropriatec: I.he monciy
and failed to construcL their project as it was projecl::cJ ,rnd \.he
construction o:: nonexistent virtual shop/property and 'l.'31 uabl o
amount of the complainants was under the control, custc-:y and
entrustment of the accused company and its officials an: Lhoy
misused the same for their own benefits and hence corrmiLLcd t.ho
offence of criminal breach of trust as defined U/s 405 1�c
punishable U/s 406 IPC. 32.Further as they all were the
beneficiary of the commission of the above said offences and as
they all- were having well in their knowledge that their all
abovementioned act:.s and omission are wrongful in nature, bul.,
still they went ahead in commission of the above menticr.cd
offences with their aforesaid modus operandi, causing Lto
complainants a huge wrongful loss upon having a Criminal
Conspiracy & Common lntention; as contemplated U/s. 120 Band 3'1 I.
P.C. The accused parsons have willfully and intentiona·.1v aided
each other in their acts with respect to the offences co�pliltncd
above and also by Lheir omission and commission abetted \.ho
offences complained within the meaning of section 107 :.l'.C and
hence have comnitted offence U/s, 109 I. I?. c., 33.That as Lhc
0 accused Persons have committed coanizable. Offences C/S 406/�0/
--9-
154
-- _ ... � ...::-.!:.. �- em::::::::,u;:
D��t:�ct C::uoc & Railway P.S.:ECONOMIC OFF.:NCES WillG Ycar:201� FXR No.:2014D080 Dat0:28
. .
rc;11d WI t.h section 415/420/109/120-B/'34 IPC & U/Sec. 12 P,C. Act
w :.hin t.he jurisdiction of Police Station of E.O.W (ALBR Unit) a .J
i.h<� complainant lodged a complaint before the E.O. l�. Cell agai:ist , �./
LhP uccused persons which was duly acknowledged received on '{:l.:
,,.·::>.?.013 vide D.D. No. D-8517. 34.That being aggrieved from the Ii .. ,.' ...
ncLs of the accused persons and suffering a huge wrongful loss an�·· . . ,.
·
,1 huqc .wrongful gain to the above mentioned accused persons, the \� ...•· .
c:omp! ainants prefers this complaint before this Hon'ble Court. �-._,: :,g•'"";�·
l'HA v 1, ll It is therefore, most respectfully prayed before this "'..::.::-�
•iof''olc Court that in view of the above mentioned facts and
:: . rc:,1mst.ances of the present matter, this Hon' ble Court may be
o c�ascd : - (l.) To take cognizance against the accused company,
, 1.i; o I rectors officials, representatives and t.o summon, try and
o•.:- sh t.he accused persons for the commission of the above
'"C .. ,. oned cognizable offences, in accordance with law. (ii) Tc
:m�s any other and further relief/order wMch this Hon'ble Col!rt
·ic:c"'IH • • L · and proper 1.n accordance with the facts & circumsta:1ces
:.: :.:ic case so as to be 1.n the interest of justice as well as of
. �c. ::omplainant/petJ.tioner. Sd/- English Complainant Through
,:01-rsci Sd/- English VINEE! BAHL & ASSOCIA!ES Advocates. For PATH
IND!-:R (INDIA) LAW FIR."1 3/115, RAMESH NAGAR, NEW DELHI-110015 CH.
No. 108, w. l�ING, TIS HAZARI COUR!S (PH. 92100-92100). Dated
l�/Ol/,Ol4. Io, The Duty Officer, PS EOW, a complaint was filed in
1.hc c:ourt of Sh. Vivek Kumar Gul1.a, Ld. CMM, Saket Courts, New
·ic:.lu u/s 156.3 cr.p.c. by Sh, Virpal Singh S/o Lt. Sh. Narayan
0
:ii.,qh & Reena Singh W/o Sh. Virpal Singh, R/o C-702, Kaveri
Ap�rLmonts, Alaknanda, ND-19. on dated 09.07.14 the Ld. Court had
q I vc:n 1.he direction for the registration of FIR on the basis cf
comp a1nt of complainant, From the contents of the
�onp'a!nt/application filed in the court u/s 156.3 cr.p.c. prima
·ac·<: a case u/s 406/407/415/tJ20/467/468/471/l09/120B/34 IPC is
r-:1Jc:<: ouL. Hence a case under above said sections may be registered
•u:o copy of FIR and original Rukka may be handed over to me fo::
'1-rt.hcr investigation. Dt. & time of Occurrence: 28.03/2007,
<>r>vMras. Place of occurrence : S-1, runerican Plaza, Internat:.onal
: raoc: !ower, Nehru Place, New Delhi. Dt. & time of handing ove=
tuqqa: 28.07.14. at 02:30 PM. Sd/- English 28.7.14. Insp. Ni::mal
:.(url1l r ,Iha SECTION-V/EOl'l CRIME BRANCH, NE�1 DELHI .Action taken at
C)C ::o station at. thJ.S time Insp. Nirmal Kumar Jha SECTION-V/E:>�I
.:mr.e 1 n t..he police station and produced the above mentioned
::<::--:> arnL for the registration of case. Case has been re9isterad.
Copy or FIR and original Rukka is beJ.ng handing over to Insp.
N · rma I Kumar Jha SECTION-V/EOl1 for further investigation. Copy of
• il w 1 11 be delivered to concerned officers through DAK. HC/DO
0
-- 10--
�Frn"::rifuRi
AT!ESTED
1a h0 ,�?n
F,u.-.. ...-;. -·
---·
. _.._ _____ _
155
(
took up 1h" lnYasUga\lon
(I) Roglstorod lh0 caso and
I.OJ: N I{ JH /\
lh) Olrcctod(Namo ol \hc
Ho,: \ 6950076
to:
(111) Roius od invostlgallon duo OR
Dls\Jlct:
c):
(IV) Translcrrod to P.S{nam
on point ot surlsdlcuon.
y g111on 10 \hi>
orrocUy rcoordod nnd o cop
lo lllo com plalnanllinlormnnt, admtuod to bo c
F.I.R read ovor
frco of cost:
complnlnanlnntormanl,
R.0.A.C:
��
14. Slgnaturo of Olflcer
slon
Slgnnturo / Thumb lmpros Namo: SURAJ PAL SINGH
com plalno nlllnlormo nt: No.: 2691140Z
of Thi! Rank: HC t
Buty Offico
n!'Cb
EOW /C· H.,. ··•
1 5 • Dille and Time ol do,;patch
to tho court: N L·�·--•
-- 11 --
r!-r ,--:;:;��=,,,.----
ATTE�TED
..:',,l:!!-l--1iTi:fff
�- ,1 6 Hr -,·.-;1
156
CIPA-R1,1101
Annexure - Accused (Known/Unknown)
Details
Dlslrlcl: Crime & P.S.: l!CONOMIC OPFENCES Ynr.• 2014FIRNo� Dalo 28-07-20'14
Rnilwny WING 80 ,.
,,
1. MS EROS RESORTS AND

HOTELS PVT I.TD
RIO; S-1. AMERICAN
PLAZA.
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
TOWER NEHRU PLACE.
NEW DELHI-I 10019
c: 01s1,:
ScX: Mole Tolophon
Datc/Vonr OccupaUon: Juris.
ol Blrlh: P.S.:
Nationallty, !NOIA
2. SATISII SOOD.
DIRECTOR
R/O: S-1. J\Ml:RlCAN
PLAZA.
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
TOWER. NEHRU PLACE.
NEW DELHI-I 10019
Dis!,:
Sox: Male Telcphono:
Q
Date/Year Occupallon: Juris.
of Blrlh: P.S�
Nahonaltly: INDIA
3, AMIT RA! SOOD.

DIRECTOR
RIO: S-1. AMERICAN
PLAZA.
INTERNA'rtoNAL TRADE
TOWER. NEHRU PLACE.
NEW DELHl-110019
Dist.:
Sex: Male Telephone:
Dalo/Year Occupation: Juris.
of Blrlh: P.S.:
N11t10nallty: INDIA
4. RAMAN SOOP.
DIRECTOR
-1-
--· -ar:r:.:i•.�· --·

A1·T1STED
,1 a r-rn ;: ;ll
qfte,iqj...................,, .............., ..�...... , ..... \
E:"\aminer.•• , ...:::.:;�:.:.:·::.'....:..":�::. !
r.
157
AIO S-1 AML,RICAN
l'I 1\/fl.
IN n:RNJ\ l10NAL TRADE
I ()WI.It. NH! IRU PLACE.
"·\\· l>l.1.111-110019
v' Sax MJIC folep
hono: Dist.:
.
OntclYoor Occupation: Juns
P.S.!
ol Birln
N311onahty- lNDIA
5 SI.Ml I SOOP.
l)lRl,C' IOH
RIO S-1 /\Mil.RICAN
J'l ·\/J\.
1"-1 IHlt�i\ rlONAL TRADE
row1m. Nm!RU PLACE.
!\h\V l)lil.111-110019
lophone: Dist.:
�· Mnlc Ta
Juris,
Oato/Yaar Occupation:
P.S�
ol B1rlh·
Na\tonality: INJ:?:IA �
Slgn�tur�1��111cor:
•
o o.Nnma. SURAJ PALSlNGH
RnnK, IIC No.: 28911402
place! hCONOMlC OFFENCES WJNG(Cnmc & Rnilway) Onto: 28-07-2014
Di.:!Y O,:,.cr
no,�: :·::n� :· .. :-:i:b
N t.,�l:u
--2--
Annexure - H 158
H
.
,.
78
· ·cc No.' 77111c
Sara K
n
Sadh & A t
h
s ar
Eros �or ts &I Hote ls Pv t. Lvstd. .
um
&
O
r.s. ·
07. 08.20
1 4
Presen t : Sh. R.P. Kas� a, couns el for com

pl
n
ai
an
Inspector Ad itya Ra nja on behalf t. In N.K. Jh .
o s t ro
e c a
n fIO p
. Status r epo �t file� the i

to e ec tha
compla nan t-�
ff t
c mpl� of
t o t
herein- bas been clubbed with cas FIR N . 80/14 P. S BOW, whi
o ch is
e
b e�n investigated by the same IO. It info by � th

i r m
e ea er t at e next
g s d d h
· dat e of hearing in that m atter is 12.09� 2014 .

• •
In view of thi s, matter-be put t: o 12.09.20
.. • • f
p n 14
.
i
..
�
K
�
G
ULIA)
Ch i e M
et p li t�tt Ma
f
o gi strat e (S
ro
outh
.... . S2ke t C
ou
r ts
, e
� tw
D llii/07.08.
2
0 )
1 4
. \ ,
'
t
..
I
!
II
' I ·I
'I
' I
I
•
k l
. .. . ,·:
. :·..
\· �..... ·
ii
.L
159
Annexure - I
U) FINAL REPORT FORM
(UNDcR SECTION 173 CRPC} , ., ,
·.t
IN THE HON'BLE COURT OF Dr. SAURABH KULSHRESTHA, LO. CHlgF•· I / :·: ~.
METOPOLlTAN MAGITERATE,(SOUTH DISTT),SAKET COURT COMPLEX, N~ ;. ( f :•:: . :·. }_
DELHI
1.
2.
Distt. EOW PS EOW
Final Re ort /Char e Sheet No.
Year 2014 FIR BO
1
Date 28.07,14?·.
3. Date -. •
•>,~~:.•
:,·..r.::,:t
·1 •
.' :.... ,,,:,-~ _'~..r, ·
.,,....
3 (Q Act V1860
~dian Penal Code, ISection I406/407/415/420/467/468/471/10 - ~
....~~~:--~
·
. 1 9/1208/34 IPC
(Ii) OtheliACts &
Section I
5. Tvoes of Final Fotm/Reoort :
6. If FR : Un-occurred. False /mistake of Fact /mistake of law/ non cognizable I

civil nature : Un-occurred
I7. I IIfCharge Sheet - Original I : I NA J ,&iwiememapt I:iX I

a. I I I
~me of Aditya Ranjan I Rank Inspector No. D-919
PIS No.
16950107
!9. I a. I Name of Compla!nanU lnfonnant IVir Pal Singh & Reena Sin9h
.,. .. b. Father's : Lt. Narayan Singh Husband's Vir Pal Singh
name name
10. Detalls of Properties Articles/ Documents recovered/ seized during

!nvesti ation and relled u on se arate list can be attached, if necessa •
S.N Property Estimated Property From whom/ Disposal

Description Value (In register where
Rs.) No. recovered or
seized
1 2 3 4 5 6
As per list of documents
11. Particulars of accused person charge -sheeted: (Use separate sheet for each
accuse :- Not a licable as cancellation re ort ..
~., .......,,--··........................
Era-1~,r ......................,.........:
-· .. . .
160
I Whether
verified
(iQ Father's : Husband's : {iiQ Date/

name name year of
birth
(iv) I Sex (V) Nationality : (VQ Passport :

No,
I Date of issue :
I
Place of : {vii) Religion Hindu (viii) Whether SC -
issue /ST
I I I
(ix) Occupatlon
I: I I I
(x)
s
Addre s
I
{xlQ Whether (xilQ Provisional Criminal
verified No.
(xiv) Regular Criminal No. (xvi} Date of arrest

if known
(xvi} Date of release on (xvii) Date of which :

bail forwarded to
Court
I (xviii} I Under Acts & Sections I : I

(xix}
(xx)
Name (s) of bailers/ sureties
address (s) &
Previous convictions with case reference
NIA
I: I
I: I NIA
(xxi) Status of Accused : I: I
12. Particulars of accused persons not charge sheeted (Separate sheet for
each susoecO: Not aoolicable
I Whether
verified 11
(ii} Sex Male (iii) Indian (iv) Passport :-
Nationalitv No.
-
.-
Date of Issue :
Place of Issue
-2-
161
Religion : - (ix) Occupation
Address
I I
Whether (xi) Provisional Criminal -
verified No.
(xiQ Status
/suspected
(xiv) Any
of
special
Accused
remarks
I : 1- -
fncluding reasons for not
charge sheeting
I 1 s. Particulars of witnesses examfned:- List Attached.
14.
-IF FR Is false, indicate action taken or proposed to be taken u/s 182/211 IPC
15. Result of Laboratorv Analvsis - NIA
I 16. I Brieffacls of the case
Sir,
The brief facts of the case are that the present case was registered on
the direction of Ld.CMM, South District, Saket Court, New Delhi u/s 156(3}
Cr.PC. The contents of the complaint forming part of FIR are as follows: In
the court of Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Saket Courts, New Deihl.
Complaint case No. of 2014. COMPLAINT CASE NO. OF 2014. IN THE
MATTER OF: 1. VIRPAL SINGH S/o Late Sh. Narayan Singh. 2. Ms.
REENA SINGH W/oSh. Virpa!Singh Both Rio C-702, Kaveri Apartments,
Alakhna�New Delhl-110019.. Complainants Versus. 1. M/s EROS
RESORTS & HOTELS PVT. LTD. THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR/S, 2. Mr.
Satish Sood (D1rector). 3. Mr. Amit Rai Sood (Director). 4. Mr. Raman Sood
{Director). 5. Mr. sumit Sood (Director). All at-S-1, American Plaza,
International Trade Tower, Nehru Place, New Delhi-110019 ...
ACCUSED/RESPONDENT. P.S. EOW ( South ). COMPLAINT UNDER
-3-
�r�
AT'TEf:. i t:.
D
1 B HB ?'l?n
.. --·- ---=� ·:__--. -=-· -=---- 162
- .
SECTIONS 190 (1) (C) OF Cr.P.C. READ WITH SECTION 200

Cr.P.C. !9· ... , '\.
Under SectrqA-.. ·
, TAKE THE COGNIZANCE OF, Offence Committed _ \.�_:-\
WITH SECTION 415/4 � ;zl.46fil�71. Aod � d�� 1 � ,_ ,-� l� _-·
420/406/407 READ - . �
s.ection 109/120B/ 34 IPC, besides tJle ptovisio ns of the prevention O � �� ,.� ;, � _/:'·:, t
0
CORRUPTiON ACT),ccompatiied With Application Under Section 156(3) ��·�.,::�
'- - :&;·;
cr.P .C. MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH: 1. Thatthe present compl � lnt � :-·-- i
case Is filed in respect of complaint filed in the office of DCP/EOW cell v1de
dairy no. D-8517 dated 21.12.2013, which is in reference to cheating and
fraud in connection with the purchase of shop by the complainants, who are
husband and wife namely Virpal Singh & Reena Singh. Photocopy of said
complaint is annexed as Annexur�"A". 2. That both the above named,
complainants purchased shop No. 8-208 (at the time of booking) in the main
Lobby, area measuring 585 sq,, feet1 which was later-on arbitrarily changed
by the accused persons with Shop No. B-54 area measuring 620 sq. feet at
Shopping Arcade, Eros Boulevard, Mayur Vlhar District Centre, Delhi from
Eros Resorts & Hotels Pvt. Ltd. Photocopy of Shop Buyer Agreement dated
28.03.2007 is annexed as Annexure-11 8 11• 3. That the accused persons i.e
Directors. Managing Director/s, Employees and Agents have cheated the
public at large and specially to the complainants by deception and
committed fraud by misrepresentation thereby Inducing the complainant to
0 deliver them their hard earned money for booking a non existing Virtual shop
by charging an exorbitant price of Rs. 26,000/- (Rupees Twenty Six
Thousand) per sq. feet by giving a false assurance based on a deceptive
visual presentation in the form of Brochures, Coloured & Attractive Site
Plans, Photos and Computer graphics presenting it to be an attractively
situated in the best of an upcoming Mall-cum-Five Star Hotels of Inter
Continental interconnected with an Atrium, Escalators, Water Fall having
lntematlonal Standards, Photocopy of coloured site plans is annexed as
Annexure-C. 4. That It was shown to be believed as a coexistent structure of
Twin Hotels with big water falls in between shops in the lobby area with
state of class in looks & ambiance as existing in Dubai and further
represented the same would be having a very high prospective value due ta
its assured occupancy by Hotel Intercontinental and assured completion
before the opening of the XIX Commonwealth Games, 201 o i.e. before
September 201 O and due to having scope of complete booking of hotel
rooms with foreign visitors during the said games and therefore there will be
-4-
•"2===· ...,_.==c.:...• -
_ ....... _.---1..:;:::...- ' ...
:..
163
shop in big lob � �}

,
•✓��
· � . tt\
/¥�
. .. ,,. .. ",; \
/¥ ;.,-�; ,(.. \11
\j
good business opportunity since beginning due to havl�g 1 P }if: <,/J '
to compl_ete th � :�\
• area on its main entrance. 5. That accused company fa1!ed J
g. T
project within their gua�ant:ed period a:sured at the time of bookin
�Q��
,j
.11-
•
accused company and its directors, officials_ and estate agents attracted th��:f
complainants to book a commercial shop t.e. Shop No. B-208 of 585 sq.
feet., In Plot No. 13A presently arbitrarily shifted to B-54 on Lobby Level, at
Shopping Arcade, Eros Boulevard, Mayur Vihar, District Centre, Delhi by
showing: a rosy picture forcing us to pay 5 times much higher price of Rs
26,000/- (Rupees Twenty Six Thousand Only) per sq. feet, which is still not
existing after passing of 7 years despite the fact that in the last 7 years value
of all the properties increased more then 10 times. 6. That the undersigned
complainants were kept in dark with respect to the approvals of the building
plans from the government agencies and no Intimation of communications
were ever given from the accused company, its directors, officials and
agents, in initial two years after receiving the amount for starting of raft
construction with respect to construction, status, building plans, completion
& branding of hotel chains which was the main essence of the deal. 7. That
the complainants had already made the payment of Rs. 1, 17, 96, 500/-
(Rupees One Crore Seventeen Lac Ninety Six Thousands and Five
Hundred Only) to the accused company through cheque/s and in cash also
till date and detail of the same is as under:- Sr. Ch. Pass Date. Ch No.
Amount. Made of payment.1 , 03-01-2007. 584915, 10,00,000h cheque. 2.
25-01-2007, 584916, 12,81,500/, cheque. 3. 03-04-2007, 797241,
15,21,000/ cheque. 4. 10-08-2007, 802748, 15,21,000/ cheque. 5. 07-06 -
2008, 811320, 7,60,5000/ cheque. 6. Amount received in adjustment of
rates 47,12,500/-. Total 1,17,96,500/-. 8. The accused company, its
director/s & officials till date has played were tactfully with the complainants
and the height and magnitude of cheating by the accused company, Its
director/s and officials could be Judged from the fact that the accused
company inspite of issuing the receipt of payment made by the complainants
In cash for an amount of Rs. 47, 12,500/- (Rupees Forty Seven Lao Twelve
Thousand and Five Hundred Only) adjusted the same by showing the
reduction of Rs. 6,500/- in the rates of per Sq. Feet i.e. from Rs. 26,000/- per
Sq. feet to Rs. 19,500/- per sq. feet and fraudulently received a huge
amount by indulging them in their net and succeeded in their hidden object
and avoided the receipt of the amount received from the complainants.
-5-
f.
!
I
164
.. ...,,.,-_;:::;-
,,,-•.. . . .,
{( \.'
Photocopy of payments receipts are annexed as Annexure•'�p�,. � · . -
. ,,. . ,. .. :. :
{Collectively). 9. That in the case of all other buyers the company R�s • . . . , "- . ,
· ·:.
increased Basic Sale Price of other investors on the pretext of changl'lg�- , ,. . 11
Locafi. i:\: •� -- . ·
their Shop's No., Area, Location and also charged PLC_ (Preferenc� ":! / : ;;:� ;� .: .
-;
Charges) for arbitrarily changing the shop's location accordm g to lis��.::, t ,, , . .

,
convenience and in the case of complainants from whom the accused ��-:- ·
company received an huge amount in cash has reduced the Basic Sale
Price of the complainant's shop as mentioned above, and motivated to the
complainants and get them agreed for the same on the ill advise given by
the representatives of the accused company and very cleverly reduced their
liability on papers. Till tiling of the criminal Complaint against the accused
company and its representatives the complainants felt it uncomfortable for
themselves due to having no receipt for the amount paid in cash and
adjusted by reducing the Basic Sale Price by the accused company and its
representatives and accused company also succeeded in their cheating
plans by accepting cash separately from its customer/buyers by assuring
that in case of making payment in cash they may generate passage to
reduction of stamp duty and also waived off interest and penalty part due to
not making further payments on demand of the accused company despite
0 the fact that , after first demand for raft the accused company failed to raise
any demand for next two years as per its demand schedule fixed at the time
of agreement. In this way, almost all the investors were/are cheated by
accused company and this was also the main reason for the complainants
for not coming ahead earlier or for not making complaint alongwith several
other buyers despite the fact that no one is still ready to accept purchased
property because whole project of the company is failed due to not fulfilling
the assurances made Initially with its investors/buyers and presently its
completely a failed project and accused company is having advantage of
receiving huge payment in cash without issuing any receipt to its
investors/buyers. 10.The accused company deliberately and intentionally
shown the entrance of lobby's shopping area from the front main road in its
site plan and also shown construction of two plots together despite the fact
that the accused company and its representatives were not in capacity to
construct the project as shown to the complainants and !ater�on, changed
the plans and complainants been kept in dark till date and did not receive
any communication about change of plans or the reasons for changing of
·6·
.. r
ATTESlED
1 B F�P. r1n
�----'='----'===-·.:.-·
165
--- ----·-- f�,.__.
was met on
the plans. 11.That monetary demand of the a cused company 7
same comp
.
a y 1.e.
• · c:me not only in this project but in the other project of the � 9;-;;.;-...�-.:
\i :r q,
at Lake Wood City, Surajkund, Lakkarpur, Haryana, where the complainants � ;s,:.; � � ,
are also separately and jointly investor/buyer of two different plots of area O
�t' 't �
j �lJJJP ;�
-1<,....
J}� k.
measuring 1100 Sq. Yard and 500 Sq. yard vide plot no. A-36 & C-52 �
12.That the accused company could not give any clear picture of the proj ec i ��
in the past and the construction was not initiated for more then two years. by 1t>e,;� � �
i:'Jr Sout\\
the accused company without any reason and arbitrarily lingered the project
from the Common Wealth Games as it was assured and presented at the
time of booking that during the games period there will be huge foreign
customers from all over the world besides the foreigners, who will stay in the
said five star hotels. 13. That as per Shop Buyer Agreement, completion of
the project was committed to the complainants within 30 months from the
date of demand for construction of Raft, which should be at least six months
before Common Wealth Games and there were several other verbal
assurances & commitments committed by the accused company, its
director's and officials regarding completion of the project well In advance as
they got tile conditional allotment of land and In case of not completing
project within the stipulated period they will lose lots of incentives from the
0 hank & the government which amounts to big amount if the project will not
be completed & operational before Common Wealth Games. 14.That the
accused company availed all the benefits by showing that the project
completed before Cornman Wealth Games on papers with the active
connivance of officials of concerned departments, who issued wrong
certificate/s & llcenses to the accused company in order to facilitate the
accused company and its director & concerned officials ,who are also co-
accused and must be book under the Prevention of Corruption Act and the
director/s and officials of accused company are also liable to giving ihem
bribe for availing false certificates. 15.The accused company has failed to
get any International or reputed Hotel and Hotel Intercontinental cancelled
its agreement with the accused company due to using inferior material and
not completed project in accordance of as earner shown on papers and
promised period and the complainants were/are not in position to cancel
their agreement with the accused company due to already paying huge
0 amount and executing one sided agreement prepared by accused company
and there was dominating position of the accused company on its
-7-
r
''
---=-::�..�:;;; ::::__;:I:::i��o;;, ,, .•\.�==ll_
1r;.,7 ,. .. 1
ATTEr_TED
•
\
i
l 1 B HP. ·nn
'
,
166
Investors/buyers. 16. That the accused company intentionally

• misrepresented to attract its customers at the time of booking. The accused
Company misled its customers as complainants by giving the assurance ~f
tie-up with big hotel chains and after collecting huge amount from public
accused company changed their tie-ups by frequently changing the brands
of hotel chain i.e. Hotel Intercontinental, Hotel Crown Plazas, Hotel Holiday
Inn and presently sonic infamous hotel Is running i.e. Hotel Double Tree and
the entrance of the complainants which was earlier from the front side on
papers and presently its from the back side in actuality, which cannot
generate good footfall as earlier projected. 17. That all wrongs committed by"'
the accused company came In the knowledge of the complainants after
going through in detail from the contents of the FIR No. 245/2011, lodged in
P.S. E.O.W. by another buyer/investor namely Rachna Arora and the
cheating and fraud committed by the accused company, its director/s and
officials with the complainants Is two steps extra and the complainants also
have all the similar grievances and not Only the complainants in-fact, all the
investors & buyers are also sufferer due to ,Wrongful conduct of the
accused company and its officials. The material facts mentioned In the F.I.R.
No. 245/2011, registered in P.S. E.O.W. Cell may kindly be considered as
part of present complaint and same are not repeated for the sake of brevity
0 and same Is annexed as Annexure-11D11• 18.That particularly, in the Eros
Boulevard, Mayur Vihar project of the accused company, complainant's faith
from the accused company completely, disappeared when accused
company failed to arrange the tenants or failed to let out or also failed to pay
assured rent, which was orally assured or committed at the time of obtaining
signatures of the complainants on the well drafted N.O.C. by the accused
company, which was obtained by giving further false assurances by the
accused company, Its director/s and officials to give it before the E.O.W. Cell
In the abovementioned F.I.R. lodged against the accused company. 19.That
as per knowledge of the complainants accused company and Its directors
approached to Hon'ble High Court and sought the quashing of said FIR
whereby in Crl M.C. No. 763/2012 the accused company and its directors
settled their matter with the several complainants and as per final order
dated 29.08.2013 Hon'ble High Court observed that the accused company
0 and its directors sealed their matter with 9 other investors/buyers by
reimbursing their amount with interest and Hon'ble High Court also levied
-8-
't[~T<li'•tu•••t•..t f . , _. . . -,♦Htll•""''ltlHtlf
Ete:~":;~~-: ........ ...................... ..
167
-·· . J
..!.- -
. ..... .,,, .. .... '

...
�- ·\
•,
cost of Rs. 4,00,000/-(Rupees Four Lac Only) for quashing the proceedings
<? against the petitioners (Directors of Company} in order to maintain the .. .
peace in the society. It further transpired from the order dated 29.08.2013
that' this quashing order shall not affect on the easels of any other investor/s
or buyers. Copy of Hon'ble High Court's Order dated 29.08.2013 is annexed
for the kind perusal of this Hon1 ble Court as Annexure-1 'F". 20.That from the
perusal of F.1.R. registered against company and High Court's Order dated
29.08.2013, its clearly transpired that the accused company and its officials
committed several wrongs and therefore, accused company reimbursed the
amount received with interest to Its several investors and undersigned
complainants are also innocent victims of accused company and its officials
and the complainants not only invested with the accused persons but also
due to believing on the words of the representative of the accused company
that they will certainly either refund the amount of the complainants with
appropriate interest just after finishing the criminal matter pending against
them or they will compensate the complainants by providing or arranging
permanent occupier/tenant who will pay at least rent to the complainants Rs.
1751- to Rs. '22.S/- per sq. feet and accused company and its representative
further requested to co-operate by signing on the NOC drafted by accused
0 persons. 21.That after believing on the words of accused persons the
complainants. signed on the reply/N.O.C. already prepared by the officials of
the accused company and also due to having other money on stake
invested in accused company's other project, possession of which was also
pending at that stage and received few days back, which was kept on hold
by the officials of accused company in order to pressurize the complainants
1o restrain themselves to be part or party of earlier Investigation pending
against them. 22.That from the contents of already registered FIR, the
complainants have came to know that the .accused company, its directors,
officials and associated persons have further cheated the Government,
Department, firstly by getting allotment of land by manipulating officials of
D.D.A. and thereafter, by availing several benefits under the beneficlal
schemes declared by the Government of India in order to promote the XIX
Commonwealth Games, 2010 by fraudulently showing the {incomplete)
project as functional prior to Common Wealth Games i.e on 03.10.2011.
0 This act of the accused company was/is part of the major conspiracy linked
to the Common Wealth Scam since the date. of having allotment of two
-9-
�1,,u,,,,,1••••• .. •••, ..... u .. ..-•....
E)l�-:r�r.. ,.,, .. ......

• ••1
1 ••···••·• • 1••·· •·
168
.!.
,, ,__, ...... �,
.....\,,ctrcnor-,�
�/� -;,,.!_::J,ji' ;;;?'\. I
.,_
different plots and showing it combined project and accused• company /\fr� .-1,· � • '" I l�.·-\\�'\
_, habitual offender of doing such offence in order to attract the investors a 1� � "'i$/f;
:t2r 5J, -�!Jl
collected money from the public at large and accused company and ■
•NF.,,�� 0
..,:,,/';. /
_.,, ., G\'-'' '( ✓J
representative , officials are habitual offender and cheated the complainant �....�
in a preplan manner. 23.That the complainants have been mislead .by the
accused company with an intention to oause wrongful gain to themselves
and wrongful loss to the complainants. The complainants have been
cheated and induced to pay an amount of Rs. 1,17,96,500/- (Rupees One
Crore Seventeen Lac Ninety Six Thousands and Five Hundred Only) to the
accused company and its officials, on their false assurances and promises.
24.That the false and misleading representation by the accused company,
its director/s, officials is presently well proved from the orders of Hon'b\e
High Court. The above mentioned cheating & fraud by way of deceptions
have been practiced on the complalnants by the accused company and its
officials since beginning of the transaction and the intent and design is very
well evident from the conduct of the accused persons if the complainants
knew at the time, of inducement that there are two different plots and could
not be constructed together as projected by the accused company and plans
shown to them are not sanctioned and they were selling space i.e.
0 nonexistent shops to the customers by committing false assurances and
collecting money. 25.That presently it's well established and on record that
the accused company and lts representatives have been cheated similarly to
its all the investors and the persons who took the stand of making
complaints against the accused company succeeded to get their money
back and the undersigned complainants were made fool by the company by
giving false assurances and the complainants restrains themselves earlier
after believing on the false assurances made by the accused company and
its persons and also due to not issuing receipt by the accused company for
the amount received In cash by the accused company and it is the fault of
the company who intentionally and malafide(y not issued the receipt to the
complainants and indulged the complainants by motivating them to made
payment in cash and reduced the Basic Sale Price in the manner as already
mentioned above in detail. 26.That the Complainants therefore given a
criminal complaint to register a F.I.R. in E.O.W. and requested to investigate
0 thoroughly about the allegations made in their complaint and proceed in
accordance with the law by bringing the accused company and Its director,
-10-
3t"':Y-FiW!a'
ATT�STED
1 B F�P. ,'I'm
169
officials, associates to book in criminal case, who have cheated the

• complainants and extracted their hard earned money. 27.That the accused
persons dishonestly induced the complainants and other investors/buyers to
part with theft substantial huge amount and the accused company
deliberately and- dishonestly failed to disclose the real facts to the
complainants regarding the affairs/dealings of the company as the accused
company's representative knew that the complainant would not have parted
with the huge amount. Thus the accused persons have committed offences
u/s 406/4071.P.C. read with section 415/420/109/120B/34 I.P. C. besides the
offences committed under the prevention of corruption acts by the Govt.
Officials, as specifically alleged and mentioned in earlier FIR against the
company. 28.That the sald accused company and its directors made false
declarations with the complainants and other buyers and also in
Government offices with the help of Govt. Officials., thus the fake completion
certificates from the several government departments were obtained by the
accused company. The accused persons have thereby committed the
offence with the active connivance of Govt. Officials and made wrong
representations before the concerned departmenUs In order to get several
benefits but failed to fulfill their obligation towards the bonafide buyers,
0 which has created valuable legal rights In their favor and the same is
''Valuable Security', within the meaning of section; 30 IPC. Hence, these
persons have also committed the offence 'of "Forgery of Valuable Security11,
punishable U/s 467 IPC. Further, the accused company have created the
above mentioned N.O.C. for the purpose of saving itself and its directors
and repeatedly cheated to the complainants, thus the accused persons
committed the offence of "Forgery for the purpose of cheating", punishable
U/s 468 IPC. Further as they used the wrong declarations as genuine,
thereby they committed the offence of "using a Forged Document as
Genuine", punishable U/s 471 IPC. 29. Further, as all the above mentioned
accused persons are connived with each other In furtherance of their
common intention of their all and they all induced the complainants to pay
them and caused the complainants a huge wrongful loss of their valuable
amount 30. Thus, it is clear that accused company, its directors, officials
and its several office bearers, professional advisers and officlals of Govt.
0 Departments acted in connivance with each other in order to provide undue
advantage to the accused company and acted} against the bonaflde
-11.
7 -----,,...----,
. ��-.
ATTTSTED
1 B 1fR ,1J1n
��l•H•n•..,•.,.n••o••■•H••o••-•••u•••
f.":!::. l"i:.E:................ •••••••• .... ••••••

170
• .L - .. 4- ..-...:i.,,.----•�..,.______
, I
buyers/investors and having their hands in same glove, thus, they all
, �ommltted the offence of Criminal Conspiracy beside the Cheating & Fraud
with bonafide purchasers. 31. That It is evident from the above mentioned
facts and circumstances that the accused persons tn collusion and
connivance with each other, deliberately malafidly and dishonestly,
misappropriated the money and failed to construct their project as it was
projected and the construction of nonexistent virtual shop/property and
valuable amount of the complainants was under the control, custody and
entrustment of the accused company and its officials and they misused the
same for their own benefits and hence committed the offence of criminal
breach of trust as defined U/s 405 IPC punishable U/s 406 !PC. 32.Further
as they all were the beneficiary of the commission of the above said
offences and as they all- were having well in their knowledge that their all
abovementioned acts and omission are wrongful in nature, but, still they
went ahead in commission of the above mentioned offences with their
aforesaid modus operandi, causing the complainants a huge wrongful loss
upon having a Criminal Conspiracy & Common Intention; as contemplated
U/s. 120-B and 34 1.P.C. The accused persons have willfully and
intentionally aided each other in their acts with respect to the offences
-0 complained above and also by their omission and commission abetted the
offences complained within the meaning of section 107 I.P.C and hence
have committed offence U/s. 109 I. P. C., 33.That as the accused persons
have committed cognizable. Offences U/S 406/407 read with section
415/420/109/120-B/34 IPC & U/Sec. 12 P.C. Act within the jurisdiction of
Police Station of E.O.W (ALBR Unit) and the complainant lodged a
complaint before the E.O.W. Cell against the accused persons which was
duly acknowledged received on 21.12.2013 vide D.D. No. D-8517. 34.That
being aggrieved from the acts of the accused persons and suffering a huge
wrongful loss and a huge .wrongful gain to the above mentioned accused
persons, the complainants prefers this complaint before this Hon'ble court.
PRAYER It is therefore, most respectfully prayed before this Hon'ble Court
that in view of the above mentioned facts and circumstances of the present
matter, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased : - (i) To take cognizance against
the accused company, its directors officials, representatives and to summon,
try and punish the accused persons for the commission of the above
mentioned cognizable offences, in accordance with law. (ii) To pass any
- 12-
ir----.=::::::::::s==---.
'51 !.i�11 fara
-A
ATTE�TED
1 B FEB ?�Pn
--I'...-
.: .... iJ,, ... ,,nH••••u-■1111u,,1uu■-..,1•••
- .-.. ,.•, r • ••• ••···•••·••••••••••••••••

--·- .. - -- __ ..___,._ .,... I,
- -
l
171
P roper -
other and further relief/order which this Hon'ble Court deems fit- and _ , �� ,
.f i /�
be m the � � -:i." ".'� �;,·�-?
, !n accordance with the facts & circumstances of the case so as to
interest of justice as well as of the complainant/petitioner. Sd/- English 'i,fr�i
complainant Through counsel Sd/- English VINEET BAHL & ASSOCIATES ); \�
Jf/}
' f/J
Advocates . For PATH FINDER (!NOIA} LAW FIRM 3/115, RAMESH 1,.��i>'tSr c:� � J .,
NAGAR, NEW DELHl-110015 CH. No. 108, W. WING, TIS HAZARI �'),s0��
COURTS (PH. 92100-92100). Dated 15/01/2014. To, The Duty Officer, PS I
EOW, a complaint was filed in the court of Sh. Vivek Kumar Gulia, Ld. CMM,
Saket courts, New Delhi u/s 156.3 cr.p.c. by Sh. Virpal Singh S/o Lt. Sh.
Narayan Singh & Reena Singh W/o Sh. Virpal Singh, Rio C-702, Kaveri
Apartments, Alaknanda, ND-19. On dated 09.07.14 the Ld. Court had given
the direction for the registration of FIR on the basis of complaint of
complainant. From the contents of the complaint/application filed in the court
u/s156(3} cr.p.c. prima facle a case u/s 406 /407 /415 /420 /467 /468 /471/
109/1208/34 IPC ls made out. Hence a case under above said sections may
be registered and copy of FLR and original Rukka may be handed over to
me for further investigation. Dt. & time of Occurrence: 28,03/2007, onwards.
Place of occurrence : S-1, American Plaza, International Trade Tower,
Nehru Place, New Delhi. Dt. & time of handing over Ruqqa : 28.07.14. at
02:30 PM. Sd/- English 28.7.14. lnsp. Nirmal KumarJha SECTION-V/EOW
CRIME BRANCH, NEW DELHI.Action taken at police station at this time
lnsp. Nlrmal Kumar Jha SECTION-V/EOW came In the police station and
produced the above mentioned complaint for the registration of case. Case
has been registered. Copy of FIR and original Rukka Is being handing over
to lnsp. Nlrmal Kumar Jha SECTION-V/EOW for further investigation. Copy
of FIR wlll be delivered to concerned officers through DAK. HC/00
It is pertinent to mention here that previously a complaint of the Complainant

was received at EOW vide No.D-8517 dated 21.12.2013 and the inquiry was
conducted by Inspector Nirmal Kumar Jha, the then EO of the complaint
During enquiry various documents were collected and the same has also
been made part and parcel of the present case.
<J
After registration of the present case, investigation was taken up by
Inspector Nirmal Kumar Jha, the then 10. Thereafter, the complaints of (1)
Sanjay Bhargav and Radha Bhargav, (2) Ashlsh Kumar Sadh and Saras
- 13 -
172
Kumar Sadh were also received and the same were clubbed with the
present case. After transfer of Inspector Nirmal Kumar Jha, the case was ,::<;:: :, . ;
marked to the undersigned for further investigation.
•'.,
'ti�� .._�s;,:}-r [ :·
"
,.
.,,.
ff) -t<.!1 ·:•\·.�·
�:'\ ••' ·., ,
During the course of investigation all the complaints were scrutinize ij
and it was learnt that they had invested their money in the year 2006 \� ,.. .;,;,, •: .....�. ·• .j
\.\ •>. " . �'\
onwards for allotment of shops of vari9us sizes at Shopping Arcade, Eros �•;n::�� ;. /,
✓
Boulevard, to be constructed by Mis Eros Resorts and Hotels Pvt. Ltd. at -� •· - ;

plot No.13A, Mayur Vihar District Centre, New Delhi.
These investors had made the payment of approximately 15% to 20%

of the total amount for allotment of the shop as booking amount to M/s Eros
Resorts and Hotels Ltd. along with the application form. The Application
form in respect of these applicant were collected and placed on the case
record. Relevant paras of the application form signed by all these applicants
are as under:-
•....whereas hotel plot No.13A In Mayur V/har Distriat Centre, Deihl was allotted to the
aompany by Delhi Development Authority (ODA) vide allotment letter no.
FB4(11)2006/CU2155 dated 30.06.2006 and the physical possession of the said plot was
taken over by the company on 06.12.2006".
"........ and whereas, vide Conveyanae Deed dated 14.12.2006, the freehold ownership
rights in the said plot No.13A, Mayur Vihar District Centre, Delhi has been duly granted,
conveyed, sold, released, transferred and assfgned unto the company".
"..... .....and whereas, the company proposes to developed 'Complex' on the said plot
No.13A, comprising of a hotel together with the shopping complex. The name of the
same shopping complex be Eros Boulevard (hereinafter referred to as the �reade7
consisting of showroomslshopslATMs!Kiosks of various sizes and dimensions on the
said plot ofland."
•..........and whereas, the aflottee has approached the company or the reservation and
alfotment of showroomslshops/ATMs/Klosks in the said Arcade."
•.......... and whereas the Aflottee has perused and understood the terms and condlllons
of the tender and auction documents, alfotment lefter and the conveyance deed in
respect of the said plot and the a/lottee has satisfied himself/itself as to the title of the
company and the permitted use(s) of the said plot."
-14-
----♦ - - � .. Q..!.-,-,•,i::~,:...:=,,,.=...:....:........_-====-=-- . , 1,
173
• ...... ... and whereas the allottee has noted and understood that the building plans o� the \�i)\!��h:�. \
complex are tentative and have yet to be approved by ODA and/or competent authontle! , �.
Including Delhi Urban Art Commission {DUAC) etc. etc. The alfotment of space 1 :.: :;
therefore contingent upon the approval of the building pfans by the DDA and such oth • .,'
authorities and a/so subsequent additions and alterations therein as may be made by th
company and approved by the DDA."
".... .•and whereas the company has represented and the aflottee has understood that the
company Is not permitted lo start construction before the said plans are duly approved I
sanctioned by the aforesaid authorities. u
•.. ... and whereas the alfottte has Inspected the said plot, tentative building plans,
ownership records of the said plot and the a/lottee ls fully satisfied in all respect with
rigard to the right, tille and authority of the company to execute this Agreement."
•..... ...and whereas the a/fottee having satlslied itsetflhfmsetflherself with the facts as
stated aforesaid and the legal rights of the company, has applied for allotment of a
showrooms/shopslATMs/Kiosks In the sald Arcade and the company has agreed to
reserve I allot the same on the temis and conditfons mentioned hereinafter.�
Thereafter, the builder company entered into Shop Buyer Agreement

and Issued allotment letters to these investors / intending buyers for
allotment of shops in Eros Boulevard. True copies of these shop buyers
agreement executed between the investors / intending buyers were also
obtained and the relevant paras of this Agreement are reproduced below;-
•............ 1 (b) the altoltee has understood and accept that the aforesaid area is tentative
end /s subject to change at the time of approval of building plans I revised building plans
and I or on completion of the said complex and that the atlottee shaf( not raise any cfaim
orobjections in regard thereto."
"....... 1(d) it is clearly understood by the A/lottee that the space to be audited ls
provisional and ls being considered on the basis of the drawings displayed in the office of
the company and the same Is subject to change In the area, dimensfons, position,
number, shape or change in floor or location during the course of/at the time of
necessary approval(s) or construction or any time thereafter at the sole discretion of the
company and the decision of the company shall be final and binding on the Allottee
without any rights or claims or interference of the Alfottee. However, as a resull of the
above-mentioned alterations, if any area Is Increased or decreased the price shaft stand
[
�:s:i1"(LTc{
AtTt::. TE·D
1 8 HP. 1 -:1;1
."ifi.�
-
,a, .. lu,1H1•"•••••'••H-U"•••••••••
11
"'3 'l'lir.P.r ... .. • • ............... .

. .t
174
/: - �,;,,..
.-:..�···,,,::
\·� • -.,.
nce Deed in case of/:--;.. / �/

J
Jncreased/decreased proportionately prior to Registration of �onvefa

the extra I'�-· .! i tiw••� •
r/ecrease in area the company shall be llab/e to refund w1lhout mterest only J
pnce and such other prorate charges as recovered and in case of Increase in area the\\ �- -�\\ ,f;t_:/ ;
'¾ - � <J.
company be entitled to recover from the A/fottee addlffonal price and other proportionate �h � .;::'J
charges, as the company determines, without interest as the case may be. The company '� '?c 7 :
i- �,;; : , ,.
J
shall afso have a right to allot alternate space to the Altottee, which the A/lottee hereby �:_..,...
' unconditionally agrees without demur/objection.�
a2(d) .............. the A/fottee further agrees and confirms that the calculations of the
company about the super area to be charge shall be final and binding, which shall not be
questioned or challenged by the Allottee. The Allottee has further agreed and understood
that the allotment the said space shall not carry with ft any right to use of common
faci/ltfes. It ls, however, agreed that if the maintenance and replacement charges and all
other dues are pafd regularly as provided in these presents the alfottee or anyone else
lawfully claiming under him /her shall have a righf to use a common facflities. a
•.......... 3(A) that the company and the allottee hereby agrees that the amounts pald on
reseNation and subsequent fnsta/fments as the case may be, will collectively constitute
the Earnest Money which is 15% of the Sale Price of the said space. The Earnest Money
shall be non refundable and shaft be retained by the Company to ensure fulfillment, by
the Alfottees of the terms and conditions as contained in the applicaflon and this
Agreement."
•.........6(e) that In case of delay of 60 days in making payment by the Alfottee to

the company as per the schedule of payment, the company shall have the right to
terminate thfs Agreement and forfeit the Eamesl Money as detailed hereinabove without
any further notice. The company shall also be entitled lo charge interest @18% p.a
compounded quarterly from the due date of installment, as per the Schedule of
Payments, tlll the date of payment, without any notice or communication therefore. R
•............ 6(() In case of failure or refusal on the part of Allottee to execute the
Maintenance Agreement or any ofher Agreement as required the Company may at Its
option, terminate this Agreement and forfeit the earnest money and adjust other dues
incfudlng the Interest, if any, from the amount deposited by the AJ/otlee."
•........... 6(h)The Alfottee agrees that In case of its failure to pay to the company
the amounts due In tfme as stipulated herein and/or as demanded by the company in
terms of this Agreement and the Schedule thereto, the company sha/f have the absolute
right to cancel this Agreement at its sole discretion and In such a case the earnest
0' monies to the extent of 15% of the Sales vafue of the space in terms of this Agreement
whether already paid before the executfon of this Agreemenht or paid subsequently in
terms of this Agreement will stand forfeited as liquidated damages for non pelformance
-16-
175
.. .. ' • i.-.:.· .:,..••:..a·-:.::..� --=t...-----'=--..,____
of the terms of this Agreement and the Agreement wf/1 stand cancelled Ipso facto and the
Allottee shall be left with no lien, right, title, Interest or claim of whatsoever nature in the
said space •••.•••••.•• N
h............ o(i) In charges, payable hereunder, and/or under the Maintenance

Agreement which may be executed separately in addition to the present Agreement or
under nay other Agreement executed between the company and the Allottee, the
Company, reserves its right to withdraw all or any of the facilities and other amenUies and
also disconnect electric and or water supplies to the allotted space and may also refuse
entry......... u
These paras of application form and shop buyers agreement shows

that at the time when initial payment was made to M/s Eros Hotels and
Resorts Pvt. Ltd. along with application form for allotment of commercial
shop the Complainants / intending purchaser were having the knowledge
that the above builder company was not having the requisite approvals from
the local bodies and building upon the plot in question was yet to be
constructed. Therefore, no mis�representations in this regard were made by
the alleged company to the investors and the status of the project was
disclosed in the application form as well as shop buyers' agreement.
During investigation It Is also revealed that M/s Eros Resort and Hotel
Private Limited, S-1, American Plaza, International Trade Tower Nehru
Place, New Delhi, has purchased two hotel plots bearing nos. 13 A & 13 B
situated at Mayur Vihar District center New Delhi on 05/06/2006 in an
auction for Rs. 118 Crore each for construction of two five star hotels having
commercial/retail spaces for the purpose of Common Wealth Games which
was scheduled to held in Oct. 2010. Thereafter the company was allotted
two plots, above mentioned vide allotment letters no. F84{11 )/2006/CU2155
and F84{12)/2006/CL/2155 dated 30/06/2006. M/s Eros Resort and Hotel
Private Limited made a payment of Rs 236 Crores on 27/09/2006. Although
the possession of said plots were handed over after completion of the
payment but the formal letters of possession of the said plots were issued
on 05/12/2006. Thereafter, the registered conveyance deed for plot no. 13-A
&13-B were executed by the DDA with the Sub-Registrar-VII/ New Delhi
vide registration No.25320 in additional book no.1, Vol.2531 on Page
No.168 to 173 and registration No.25321 in additional book no.1, Vol.2331
-17-
-
r
�-
ATTEfTED
I
1 B H8 ?}JO
'
176
_1.. .. t...-.J...- -- ·----- .. • - --- - •
on Page No.174 to 179 respectively. The company also executed /, <

performance security amounting to Rs. 5,9 Crores for each plot by means oy; · ..,· ·.: ·. :' •: .
,. .. . 1
. �
J.
bank guarantee. r.
; .:.• ; ?:./2,..-- , ·: f: :
.:::. �-, f"...�J
s� ,..,_ -.;��,
. ., /h .JI -�
�
During Investigation the above said facts were also corroborated DDA�� T-\•. /
.;.
The documents In this regard were also collected from the ODA. These ��:-Y
documents were examined and no irregularities were notice in the allotment
of these two plots. The reply from Director (Bldg) C & I and Director {CL) of
DOA suggest that the hotels to be constructed over plot No:-13A and 138
Mayur Vihar District Center, Delhi, was Common Wealth Games linked
project but the plot sold to alleged company was not linked to Common
Wealth Games. It was further clarified that no benefits in terms of additional
FAR etc as well as concession facllities, financial benefits etc have been
given to the purchaser. Deputy Director (CL), ODA also clarified that there is
no existing rules/polices/terms and conditions which restricts the alleged
company for sale/booking of space and receiving the booking amount
thereof. Even the condition mentioned in conveyance deed does not speak
about the same.
-0 The company was to complete the construction of both hotels and

make it functional within 42 months. Accordingly, despite the fact that the
possession of the plots was handed over to the company only on
12/12/2006, the company had prepared a plan for the proposed construction
and submitted the same for sanction to DOA on 04/12/2006. Thereafter, the
company commenced the process for selling the retail spaces in the
shopping arcade of the said project under the Name & Style of 11 Eros
Boulevardu at Hotel Crowne Plaza and Holiday Inn on Plot no.13-A & 13-B
respectively in Mayur Vihar, District Center, Phase-1, New Delhi.
The alleged company submitted the layout plan for sanction to the
ODA on 04/12/2006. The same was forwarded to Delhi Urban Art
Commission and Delhi Fire Service for approval by the ODA after scrutiny,
The plan was approved by these authorities on 04/06/2007 and the final
sanction plan was communicated to the company on 14/09/2007 in which
several changes were made by the DOA. Vide letter dated 20/09/2007 the
company raised its objection for the changes made by ODA. In the
-18-
---f . ....
�
ATTS�TED
1 B FfP. nm
·:r:::-·· -
177
.. -� . .... - ... -· -.. ..t-, .::.-- ,.,
i
connection company made representations before L-G, Delhi and sought
following changes:�
a). Entrance to the Hotel: Sanction the entry as was originally provided for:-� I
by ERHL at the time of submission of the plan and was duly approved by ·
OFSand DUAC
. f
b).Commercial Use of Basement Sanction the covered area in the
basement and not to adjust the same at the Ground Floor and calculate the
same in FAR as provided in the following byelaws.
c).ATRIUM: ODA have already sanctioned plans of the District Court at

Rohlni, wherein Atrium with roof of RCC has been permitted. They why the
DOA should adopt double standard for sanctioning Atrium for a government
building and of the hotel building by the private party. ERHL has provided
Atrium in the plans with appropriate natural light and thus there is no reason
as to why it should not permitted.
d). ROOM HEIGHTS: Correct the height of the banquet and lobby and other
public utility areas.
e). PORCH: Objection to Generous Porch should be removed, as in many of

the Hotels generous Pouch has been sanctioned.
But the ODA did not adhere to the request of alleged company.
Thereafter, the alleged company submitted the revised plan on 20/09/2008
which was approved on 15/012/2008. After getting approvals from the
concerned agencies the alleged company finished the construction work as
per the sanctioned building plan. Thus It can be said the allegation of
committing serious forgery by fabricating various documents submitted
before different Govt. Agencies in order to get the plan sanctioned and
availing other benefits from the Government Agencies does not hold good.
Thereafter, various prospective buyers approached the Company and

provisionally booked the space in the above said project of the Company. At
the time of the booking and again at the time of execution of the Shop
Buyers Agreement it was clarified to the prospective buyers that the Jay out
-19-
��••011.... •••••••• .. ••••u••••••••••••Ho•
E�:: it;,ar ................................ .

178
L ..... �, .. ,,. ... ,.,........,b-- ·-·
During the course of investigation, account opening form, statement of

account, other documents In respect of the bank accounts of Mis Eros
Resorts and Hotels Pvt. Ltd. maintained with HDFC Bank A/C No
00030330004119 and Punjab National Bank, large corporate branch,
Connaught place A/C No 2164002100008527 were obtained. Similarly the
bank details along wlth the requisite documents and statement of bank
accounts in respect of complalnants/investorsf intending purchasers were
obtained from their respected bank. The Scrutiny of these documents
revealed that these complalnants/lnvestors/intending purchasers had made
the payment to Mis Eros Hotels and Resorts Pvt. ltd. through account
payee cheque and these payments were credited in the bank account of the
said builder company maintained with HDFC Bank and Punjab National
Bank.
During course of investigation, the record from ROC, Nehru Place

Delhi but also in respect of M/s Eros Hotels and Resorts Pvt. Ltd. was also
collected. As per the record it was found that Shri Jagdlsh Rai Sood, Amit
Rai Sood, Satish Sood, Sumant Sood and Aditya Sood were the directors of
the alleged company. Raman Sood was never associated with the alleged
company. It was also revealed that Amit Rai Sood and Sumant Sood were
the Directors actively looking after the Project in Question.
During investigation it was also found that the alleged company
immediately submitted its building plan for both the project on 04/12/2006
after completing the required fonnalities to the ODA The DOA vide Jetter
-20-
179
-�
c\rcp:1
��
J�:;b
1
number F.13{143)06/Bldg/307 dated 05/05/2008 conveyed the provision ( .s "···:.:: '?.a \ ,\

• • permission for taking up the construction of the hotel building up to the pllnt �
level pending the statutory clearances of the building plan by the DUA i 1'Y.,>f!}
J
�'fl I
;;,ff)
CFO & MOEF. Finally, the building plan was sanctioned on 05/1212008 afte �;,� ;;_;fS!\ ,r�
making certain modification/changes in the plan initially submitted. Since the 'CJ, 80�\\'I
complainant/intendtng purchasers were allotted shops/commercial space on
the basis of the initial plan submitted to ODA hence the same were changed
in the light of sanctioned building plan. The relevant paras of the application
form as well as the Shop Buyers Agreement has been reproduced as
under;-
•.•••..•.• ..AND WHEREAS the Alfottee has noted and understood that the Buifdlng Plans
of the Complex are tentatfve and have yet to be approved by the DDA and or Competent.
Authon·ties Including Deihl Urban Art Commission (DUAC) etc. etc, The allotment of the
Space is therefore contingent upon the approval of the building plans by the DDA and
such other authorities and also subsequent additions alterations therein as may be made
by the Company and approved by the DDA. n
n•••••••••AND WHEREAS the company has represented and the Allottee has understood
that the company Is not pennitted to start construcffon before the said plans are duly
approved Isanctioned by the aforesaid authorities."
•••.•.•...AND WHEREAS the Aflottee has inspected the said pfot, tentative buf!dfng pfans,
ownership records of the said plot and fhe Alloftee is fully satisfied In ell respects with
regard to the right, title and authority of the Company to execute this Agreement n
"...........AND WHEERl=A.S the Allottee having satisfied itselflhimselflherseff with the facts
as stated aforesaid and the legal rights of the Company, has appfiad for a({ofment of the
Showroom/Shops/ATMs/ Kiosks In the said Arcade and the Company has agreed to
reserve/allot the same on the terms and conditions menlloned hereinafter."
•.••• .••••2(b) The Basic Sale Price may be recalculated upon confinnallon by the
Company of the super area and any increase or decrease in the super area shall be
payable or refundable, without any interes� at the same value as agreed here fn above."
".• •••.• 5(a) The company shall endeavor lo give possession of the said lo the Aflotlae in
30 months from the dale of sanction of plans from all the competent authorities. The
Company shall give notice lo the Allottee with regard to the date of handing over of
possession, at the Allottee address first above mentioned, and in the event the Aflottee
fails to accept and take the possession of the premises an the date of possession, the
possession of the premises shall be deemed to have been taken over by the Allottee on
t r-------------
9i".1,Q�1fu@"
ATTEfTED
1 8 FfB :m7o
180
l
the indicated In the notice ofpossession u I .J:. .

, ....... •:-:·:..•�
f
•,
-• ,.., •• •11 �
. :..
'I
\ ...
:I, . .,.l ; �, ·.. � \•

,, ,, • i. I
These paras of application form and shop buyers agreement show�.� :�\ �: :� / .. I J!
f' .. 1 {
that the time when initial payment was made to M/s Eros Hotels and\;.�;-·::'.: ·,} •:_._:,
at
Resorts Pvt. Ltd. along with applicatlon form for allotment of commercial ��!-:;, �r:•.'•'..-4'
"'
shop the Complainants / intending purchaser were having the knowledge

��=-=---
....
that the plan shown to them by representatives of the above builder
company was tentative and was yet to be approved by the concerned
authorities. Hence, the allegations of 'plan of construction existing is
completely different from what was assured does not hold good. Therefore,
no mis-representations in this regard were made by the alleged company to
the investors and the status of the project was disclosed In the appllcation
form as well as shop buyers' agreement.
The alleged company was granted building plan on 05/12/2008 but

was allowed to do the plinth level work before the grant of the same. There
after It started construction accordingly. The DDA vide is letter number
PA/DD(B)C&I/DDA/3036 dated 17/08/2010 Informed the alleged company
about the approval of policy for granting 0 Lirnited Term Use
Permisslon(partt in r/o hotels plots were the construction of hotel
component that is accommodation portion including ancillary facilities accept
the commercial portion have been completed in all respect as per the
provision of BBL. There after the company was granted "limited term use
pennission" for its both hotels on 21/09/2010. Accordingly, the NOCs from
various other Govt. agencies like Dy. Chief Fire Officers, Delhi, Dy. Electrical
Inspector, Delhi and Inspector of Lifts, Delhi, was also granted to the alleged
company.
Investigation also revealed that the Completion Certificate to M/s Eros

Hotels and Resorts Pvt. Ltd. was granted on 20/12/2010. As the building
plan was Initially submitted was altered and change were made hence, the
company again started allotment of the shops due to changes made In the
sanctioned building plan. Although it was not mandatory on the part of
alleged company to seek/obtain willingness for the same from the
complainant/intending purchasers however the company obtained the same
and the various correspondences among the company and the investors
-22-
., ---.31j
�-..:;-�P-;;4!..;;f2lm
.:rc----
··
ED
.'' ATT!ST
I
1 B' HR n1n
qf(era;,.,.,u.,...,_
.1,111,1•••--•••••••t
MH••
EXC'l•nf'• ................................... .
181
• .1.
shows that the company sought the same and these inves
• bought/purchased the shop from their choice. Hence, the allegation
arbitrary changes in location of shops and Its number by the alle
company also does not hold good.
Similarly, reply received from Deihl Fire Service, Inspector of lifts

licensing Branch of Delhi Police also clarified that no rules to grant the
respective certification were relaxed keeping in view the coming Common
Wealth Games hence, granting / availing of benefits by M/s Eros Hotels and
Resorts Pvt. Ltd. does not arise.
Investigation also revealed that the company had a tie up with the
international brands like "inter-continental" at initial stage, later it was having
an arrangement with "Hilton group". Presently It is having tie up inter
continental group again. Hence it can be safely said that the company was
having a five star association for its both hotel projects of international
brand.
During investigation, Directors of the alleged Company are also

CJ examined. It was also revealed that the alleged company had spent Rs.
646.25 Crores on the project where as it received Rs. Rs. 40.44 Crores from
the sale of these Shops.
Complaint of Reena Singh & Vir Pal Singh :-

The present case was registered on thefr complaint on the direction of
Ld.CMM, South District, Saket Court Complex, New Delhi. The
complainants provisionally booked a shop no.8-208 on lobby admeasurlng
585 Sq.ft with the alleged company through an application form In their
name. As per the appllcation form the basic sale price was Rs.1,52, 10,000/
@ of Rs. 26 thousand per Sq.ft. From the scrutiny of application form it is
revealed that the booking was provlsional and during the course of
approval/re-approval or construction or for any reason the company unable
to allot the space applied for, the company will have right to allot alternate
space in lieu of the space already reserved/applied. As per the terms and
conditions of the application form it was clear that the plans, design, and
specifications are tentative and yet to be approved by the competent
-23-
T -==--=::1;;::;.;::
:·
.', �A-� E..,...i� ! 'e, D=·
1 8 Ft� ,-;,!l
, ...................,... .
�a{(ti,u,,n.-i•• ......,• •••••
E')m"'liiner ,.........................
• ·- =·--
182
- . ---- -- - - - --· � ---- ·-·-·-c
.,......
authorities. Thereafter, the complainants also entered into Shop Buyer's 4 -:�,::,r � / )"
Agreements. As the ODA sanctioned the revised building plan submitted by f1 i
.:,c,
fJ.. ''f%�
1 g;
't� �\
alleged company for the project in question (the ODA suggested � l{- ...�
modification and changes in the original building plan submitted by the ,i,-?- '',,� �-1< ,-s
alleged company and alleged company was asked to submit the revised ,t1>'°11c;,•s��\\l
building plan) alleged company allotted the shop bearing no. 8-54 on lobby
level In plot no.13-A having area of 620 Sq.ft fn lieu of the provisionally
booked shop no. 8-208 and the same was communicated to the applicants
by the alleged company vide their letter dated 24/03/2009. The escalation in
the price of the shop was also communicated to them. Although it was not
obligatory on the part of alleged company to obtain consent for the change
in provisionally booked shop, the alleged company intimated the same to the
complainants, and they also gave their consent vide their letter dated
25/05/2009. The various communications between the complainants and the
alleged company establishes the fact that the complainants vide their letter
dated 03/05/2010 requested for cancelation of their booking and sought
refund of amount Rs.60,84,000/- and vide their letter dated 14/05/2010
requested for re-negotiation of the booking price and finally vide their letter
dated 25/05/2010 accepted the new re-negotiated price of Rs.1,20,90,000/-
for the shop allotted to them bearing no.B-54 in plot no.13A and assured for
making the balance payment in three equal installments starting from June
201 O onwards. But the complainants miserably failed to full fill their new
commitment This shows that the complainants were having every
knowledge about the status of the project and no misrepresentation and
inducement was done by the representativesfemployees and the alleged
company, which are the basic ingredients to constitute an offence of
cheating. These communications also suggests that the complainants
themselves failed to keep their words and now they want their money back
by any means and trying to give color of criminal offence to civil liability.
Apart from the above mentioned allegations they have also alleged
that the accused company and its employees have obtained fake completion
certificate from the several Govt. Departments with the help of various
Govt. officials. They have also alleged that the accused persons have
Q committed the offence with the active connivance of Govt. official and made
wrong representations before the concerned Departments in order to get
-24-
i --$-�-
"'i\�
� - -·
A,.-n�i··n=-o
1 B HB rofi
- ............,. ,...........�•···· ·-�
�,'-'.,••"'''''''". ...
�.;;---·- -
183
• ..1.
-:.
.,,,,..-:;:_-- ..
. · ·· ;"
several benefits but failed to full fill their obligation towards the bonafide ,,:
buyers, which has created valuable legal rights resulting in forgery off :- _",
•
valuable security and using the same punishable u/s 467, 468 & 471 IPC. )· · · ,. '�. l ·. :•
It is worth mentioning here that

,,
\,:') �....\ '-·: �"' .·1
;·.·'
during investigation no such��-:,;·v,;·:.;1- , ,

·. .·.a
..
· · �� s�·· •
produced any d acument in ��1 .:.4
i?
documents surfaced nor the complaina nts

support of their allegation. Hence it can be safely concluded that the
I
/
allegation could not be corroborated.
Complaints of Radha Bhargav & Sanjay Bhargav :-
During Investigation it is revealed that Initially the shop number B-203

admeasuring 750 sq.ft. on lobby floor of "EROS BOULEVARDh situated at
plot no. 13-A, Mayur Vihar was booked by Mis Rajiv sales corporation
through its partner Rajiv Arora who made Rs 47,60,000/- on different
occasions to M/s Eros Hotels and Resorts Pvt. Ltd. towards the payment of
the shop in question. He entered into the shop buyer agreement with the
company M/s Eros Hotels and Resorts Pvt. Ltd. Before entering into this
agreement he had also filled a booking form in this regard. Later on
14/11/2007 M/s Rajiv Sales Corporation sold this shop to Mrs. Radha
Bhargav and requested to Mis Eros Hotels and Resorts Pvt. Ltd for
substitution of her name in place of his company. Thereafter, Radha
Bhargav made the rest payment towards this shop.
When Mis Eros Hotels and Resorts Pvt. Ltd. was sanctioned
building plan and completed the construction, the allotment of shops was
done by the company due to changes made in the building plan. Accordingly
she was allotted new shop bearing no B-56 and the saTe amount of the shop
was decreased from Rs.1, 19,00,000/· to Rs.94,00,000/-. {t is pertinent to
mention here that Radha Bhargav also gave her written consent in this
regard. Later she also took the possession of the shop in question on
09.07.2012 and at no point of time she raised any objections with the
alleged company. It is pertinent to mentioned here that see also entered into
the Maintenance Agreement for this shop vide agreement dated 09/07/2012.
Sanjay Bhargav provisionally booked the shop B-202 admeasuring

•25-
-,
.1
184
600 Sq.ft with the alleged company vide his applicatlon form dated ��
21/11/2006 and made a payment of Rs.18,90,000/-. The basic sale price of .J,t 11-
�,,�:i:i��::-i�
the shop was Rs.1, 20 , 00,000/-@ of 20,000 per Sq.ft. After completion o g � .J$ u��
the project the alleged company allotted the shop 8-57 as the certai l
$ �, �
changes were made by the DDA while sanctioning the building plan. At the �--z ��J.J. ll)
time of allotment complainant himself had given consent for new shop and .P.,l)c;, �oul!O
took possession. Thereafter he entered in to shop buyer's agreement dated
28/03/2007. In both the documents the status of the project was crear!y
mentioned as above. Thereafter, he entered in to maintenance agreement in
respect of the shop. The complainant at no potnt of time raised his objection
nor leveled any allegation as alleged in his present complaint. The
correspondences between the company and complainant clearly established
the fact the he was appraised of each and every development related to the
project in question.
Now the complainant and his wife are raising their objections just to
get their money refunded back as the property price have gone down and it
notfetched there hypothetically calculated profit margin.
Complaint of Dalip D. Kriplani :-
The complaint of Dalip D. Kriplani Rio 1131, Sector-A, Pocket-A,

Vasant Kunj, New Delhi was received in EOW vide no.D-7296 dated
17/11/2014 and the same was clubbed with the present case as he has also
alleged more or less same allegation against the same company. In his
complaint he has made allegation as mentioned in above paras. From the
examination of the application Form and the shop buyer agreement, it is
revealed that he had provisionally booked a shop bearing no. B-217 on
lobby floor admeasuring 810 Sq.ft. at the basic sale price of
Rs.1,76,78,250/- @ of Rs.21,825/- per Sq.ft. and made a payment of
Rs.9,00,000/- with the application form. Thereafter, he made a payment of
another Rs. 65,24,300/-towards the sale consideration of the shop. From the
scrutiny of various communications between the complainant and the
alleged company it has been revealed that the complainant sold this shop to
some other persons. When the plan was sanctioned after some
modifications, the alleged company allotted new shop bearing no. B-58
-26-
-;------;-:---7
��""it�"Rf
ATTEfrED
1 B HP. 1,1ri
185
...... ---·-- -..l�L!._.:..! ......
• ..__.__
measuring 800 Sq.ft. on plot no. 13-A in place of the provisionally bookeq,f �·:./r ':'-,,,
:-
;v
shop B-52. In that communication the reason mentioned by the complain4hf .-,f.�t } �
is " the buyer/customer whom he has sold his shop is not ready to ace 5}, ·,,.��:-: 7.
t);
shop, the complainant vide his letter dated 03/04/2009 requested for anothif" ,. ;---_:-: � :.. � �
•r
the shop 8-58 offered by the alleged company." When this proposal of tli 1;,� ��r! t,,.:o\\ ..t /;
complainant was not met by the alleged company he started making false )),� Sr,u\l\ r
allegation In order to get the refund. This shows that the complainant was
merely an investor not an end user. He Invested the money in order to get
profit in short span of time.
During investigation he was asked to join the investigation and submit

the documents in support of his allegation but at none of the occasion he
bothered to join the investigation nor he supplied the document in support of
his allegation. Moreover, vide Jetter dated 19.05.2015 he has Intimated that
he has resolved issues with the alleged company and wishes to withdraw
his complaint no.D-7296 dated 17/11/2014 filed before the EOW. However,
from the investigation conducted so far neither any ingredient of cognizable
offence surfaced nor the allegation leveled were substantiated.
Complaint of Ashlsh Kumar Sadh & Sarash Kumar Sadh :-
The complaint of Ashish Kumar Sadh and Sarash Kumar Sadh was
clubbed with the present complaint In this complaint they have stated that
tiiey booked the shops· no: B-214, Lobby floor, admeasuring 815 Sq.ft. and
8-215, admeasurlng 805 Sq. ft. in Eros Boulevard being constructed by Mis
Eros Hotels and Resorts Pvt. Ltd., District Centre, Mayur Vihar, Delhi on
06.12.2006 and made payments of Rs. 63,07,117/- & Rs. 62 1 86 1 096/-,
towards the sale consideration of these shops. They have alleged that the
alleged company had changed the layout plan originally shown to them as
well as the location of their shops.
Accordingly, they decided to cancel their booking, later on they were

assured by Amit Sood, one of the Directors of the company, that after
completion of the building it wlll be a better position. He further assured
them if the location will be not better than the previous one, their money will
be refunded back with interest. But it never happened and later they came to
-27-
- ...
.,_
186
' -�- _:....:,1>..,t.e_
know that the alleged company forfeited their money, They want that th
money be refunded back with interest.
From the scrutiny of their Application Form and Shop Buye

Agreements following facts revealed:-
1. Ashish Kumar Sadh provisionally booked the shop 8-214, lobby at the
basic sale price of Rs.1,44,56,600/- @ of 20,500/- per Sq.ft. In addition
to that he had to make a payment of 7.5% of the basic sale price i.e.
Rs.1538/- per Sq. ft. as a preferential location charges.
2. When the project was completed the alleged company allotted new
shop no. 8-61 on lobby of plot no.13-A in place of the earlier one
provisionally booked and intimated the same vlde their letter dated
24/03/2009.
3 In pursuance to the letter dated 24/03/2009, Ashish kumar Sadh vide
his letter dated 12/06/2009 intimated the alleged company that in
place of shop no. 8-61, B-55 on lobby level on plot no. 13-A be
,,,. allotted. Accordingly, the alleged company adhering to his request
' ../ allotted the shop no. B-55 on lobby level of plot no. 13-A Mayur Vihar
� /. District Center.
1
4. Ashlsh Kumar Sadh vide his letter dated 16/05/2009 consented for the
I
\ change and accepted the new shop unconditionally.
'
5. Thereafter, the alleged company made several correspondences for
\ the payment of balance amount but the complainant did not bother to
reply the same nor made any payment towards the balance amount
6. Finally the alleged company invoking the clause no. 6(h) of the Shop
Buyer's Agreement terminated his agreement and conveyed the same
vide registered letter dated 09/09/2011.
7. Sarash Kumar Sadh provisionally booked the shop B-215 lobby at the
basic sale price of Rs.1,77,40,590/-@ of 20,500/- per Sq.ft. In addition
to that he had to make a payment of 7.5% of the basic sale price i.e.
Rs.1538/- per Sq.ft. as a preferential location charges.
8. When the project was completed the alleged company allotted new
shop no, B-64 on lobby of plot no. 13-A in place of the earlier one
provisionally booked and intimated the same vide their letter dated
24/03/2009.
-28-
.!. • - - � -�
!l! -- _....._ -- - . 187 _.. i I
9. Th e
him reaft er, th e alleged company made numerous corr espondences to
and as ek d for the bala n ce payment ut e e d
b h n rve r es pon ed to � c...1,;:i'·' . ;
✓
r,.,(
f
-\�_-i' ·}_
that.
e � �� ,,._
)f -... �·� ,
10. Finally the alleged company invoking the clause no. 6(h} of th 1'P�-> � � !/ I
Shop Buyer's Agre e ment terminated hi s agreement and conveyed t eh "..� � Y

sa me v e r eg iste red letter dated 09 /09 /2 0 1 . �
id
I
The reldev ant para of the claus e 6(h) of shop buyer's agreement si ,
II
m n ti n e as un e :-
e o d r
6(hJ.i
The Allottee agrees that in case of its failure to pay to the comp a ny the amounts due
in t e as stip ula ted here in and/or as demanded by the Comp any in terms o th is
m
f f
A g reement and the Schedufe thereto, the Company sha l have the absol ute rig t to
h
cancel th fs Agr eement at its sole discre t ion and in such a c ase the earnes monf s to the
t e
extent of 15% of the sales vafue of the space In te1111s of this Agre em ent wheth er alrea
dy
paid before the execution of the Agreement or paid subse q uently in term s of th ls
Agreement w i ll stand forfefted as liquidated damages for non performance of the t
erms
of th e Agreement and the Agreement will s and cancelled Ipso facto and the Alfo ttee shall
t h
be l eft with no lien, nght, title, interest or claim of whatsoever nature in t e said Space
anhd the Com pan y shall be free to dispose off/self the s aid Sp ace in any manner;
fe b v e the earn
w at soev er, at its so discretion. The amount(s), ifany, paid overand a o est
m on e y shall be refunded to the Al fotee by the Company only afler r ealizi ng the amo u nt
on re s al e, without any compensation of whatsoever nature. The Compan y shallhave first
(f en and charge on the said space for all ( ts du se and ot eh rss um
s payable by the Aflottea
to t he Co u der th is greemenl
mpany n A
the above e comp laina nt failed to provi ed any doc m

rt
s upp o rtfrom
Apa u e nt in
o f t eh ir a llegatiotnh.
N o w their grievances are refund of money along with in terest, wh c

is. a ivil a b ih
c li ility and does not constitute any r al offe cne. Th ey are
i C imin
s mply tryin g t o give criminal color to a civil matter.
Moreov er the in v estigation conducted so far in the light of alleg a o
ma y be summ ar ize d and clearly u derstood from t he fo llow ng a leti:-n made
n i tb
S.N Allegation/M is- representa tio n In vestigation
.
1. Fasl de
m e commitment were Commitment about twin project,
a to attract bon fia ed
5 star brand hotel, etc. As oer
-29-
.,·..- -.--_-_-_-_-_-..J'='-- --.

3l':,!Wi1fo'R=r
I
r ATTE:t
TE D
l 1 B FEB n,n
Ex. am tRer •••• •....•. •..•••.....••....•..•

�'""qjtll'lt o tn1t....-..u,o••Ott1.. • •• .... ..
. ,
188
investors reply from the DOA the Hotels

constructed on Plot no. 13A
&138 were the Common wealth
Games linked twin oroiect
2. Single project was sub Could not be corroborated as
divided into two projects DDA auctioned two separate
arbitrarily adjoining plots bearing no. 13A
&13B at Mayur Vihar. The
booking receipts of shops also
suaaest the same.
3. No brand outlet or five star The hotel was having contract
hotel has been associated with Inter-continental at initial
with the project as promised stage, later it was changed with
Hilton and presently again with
Inter-continental.
4. Property was sold to different The basic rate was around
investors at different rates 20,000/- per sq.ft. the copy of
and basic sate price was appUcation fonn. However, the
reduced to induce the rates were revised due to the
complainant to deposit the changes made in the plan
cash amount submitted by the company. Every
owner has negotiated the price
with company on their own on one
pretext or other with the alleged
comoanv.
5. Plan of construction existing Variation in the Plan was
Is completely different from observed. As per the Initial
what was assured. agreement and Shop Buyer's
Agreement the initial allotment of
shops were done provisionally,
and it was made clear that site
plan Is yet to be approved by
Competent authority. When the
plan was sanctioned
Complainants /Co-complainants
were finaliy allotted their
respective shops. This change
was done due to changes made
by the Competent Authority.
Moreover, most of the buyers
gave their consent at the time of
re-location of their shops and
accepted / purchased the same.
6. Completion certificates were The reply from different Govt.
obtained by accused departments was obtained and
persons fraudulently from the allegation could not be
different department prior to substantiated.
Inauguration of CWG,
-30-
. --.---
189
- --- ---- ■ -··-
through projects were

Incomplete at that time and
thus government and banks
were cheated by avalllng
subsidies and other benefits
7. Accused persons in collusion As per the reply of DDA, the
with officials of DDA got reserved price for auction of both
allotment of both the plots atthe plot was Rs. 111 er. and the
much lower rates from the plot was sold in open auction for
reserved auction price. Rs. 118 er. each. Hence, the
allegation could not be
substantiated.
8. The employees of the The allegation ls vague as no
alleged company gave where it is made clear as to what
wrong undertaking and were those.
certificates.
9. The company was bound to There is not any document or
develop the land prior to agreement that bound the
CWG but it failed to do so. alleged to develop the shop prior
to CWG. Moreover, Hotel Project
was CWG linked. It Js worth
mentioning here that for delay in
completion of the hotel project
DOA tried to encash the bank
Guarantee deposited as
performance guarantee by the
alleged Company but the same
was stayed by Deihl Hrgh Court
and Arbitration proceeding is
going on between the alleged
comoanv and the DOA.
10. The company availed Could not be corroborated. Hotel
several benefits from various was granted Limited term use
Government departments certificate on 21.09.2010 by DDA
falsely shown to be which was duly approved by the
operational before CWG. Competent Authority and meant
This happened with active for the Hotel Project linked to
connivance of Government CWG only. Moreover,
officials Completion Certificate was
issued to the hotel on
20.12.2010.
11. The company collected huge As per the reply received from
amount from public with false the alleged company it has spent
commitment and assurance. Rs. 646.25 Cr on both the hotel
project where as they have
received Rs. 40.44 Crore from
the Shoo Owners.
.. -31-
190
____ .:.:.J.::!. ... L' ··: •-• . !l -
12. Toe complex comprising of It is found true. Both hotels

hotel together with complexes are having shopping
showroomsfshops/ATM/Kiok area with the entrance by the
s etc side of Recection Counter.
13. The fact that the company The allotment Is described in
was allotted the land in June every agreement entered
2006 was concealed. between the complainants and
thealleaed.
Misrepresented that the Not corroborated In absence of
j,4, physical possession of the any supporting document.
PIQ was taken by them on
6.12.2006 and the
conveyance deed was in
their name
15. Believing on the The application forms, terms and
misrepresentation the condition and Shop Buyer's
complainants booked the Agreement are contrary.
shops and paid the earnest
money
16. The complainant paid the The same is a fact and proved,
/ booking amount in as 1t clear from the scrutiny of
November 2006 onwards but complaints. However, no
the company entered into an criminality was found in the light
agreement with them and of reply from DDA.
other buyers from March
2007 onwards.
1J, In July 2007 the accused The same Is a fact and proved,
demanded for raft, meaning as It clear from the scrutiny of
thereby the plan ls approved. complaints. However, company
was allowed to carry out the
construction up to plinth level by
DDA during pendency of the
aooroval of buifdina olan.
1J3, The company kept complete This is false as the same is clear
sflence after that later from the application form and
intimated the Investors that agreement
the allotment of shops was
provisional and subject to
chance.
19. The company cheated the -as above-
complainant by showing rosy
pictures and secondly
cheated by selling non-
existma shoos.
20. Cheating and fraud on the There are lots of letters from both
part of accused person the side that shows
establishes when thev comolalnants were well
-32-
��.u,,,1 .. LI-HUh1•11,n11nu11,,, .... ,
E:l:t.t'l"lin:er •••••••.. ......................

191
Issued demand letter communicated about every

containing assurance that development and most of the
construction to be started things are in written form.
when plan were approved
and the project was to be
completed within 30 months
i.e. on or before January
2010
21. Misrepresented the project -As per the reply in para 9
as time bound project to be above-
completed before CWG
2010. Possession was to be
given within 30 months from
1st oavment of raft.
22. Entrance of the shopping Shopping area has entry from
area was projected from front as well as back of the Hotel.
front.
23. Promised for assured rent. There are no documents
sucaesting the same.
24. The shop number and Its As per the Shop Buyer's
location were changed Agreement lt was not necessary
arbitrarily/without consent moreover most of the buyer's
have given their consent or
chosen on their own.
25. The AR/agent of the Not corroborated however, the
company had promised to changes made in the plan due to
give shop in the lobby but it changes made by the Competent
Is in the back side. So Authority during the course of
neither the shop was opened approval which was well drafted
nor they run. in the agreement Now, Llquor
Shop is runninA In that complex.
26. There Is a board in which During Inspection [t was not
440 volt Danger written on It, found.
is there nearthe shop
During investigation "it is also revealed that the complaints of above

mentioned complainant was received in the EOW and the same was closed
on the ground of "Civil Matter' as well as the part of previously investigated
case FIR NO. 245/11 against the same company with similar allegations.
Conclusion:-
In view of the details of the investigation mentioned above, no
-33-
q.ftatqi.,,,uu.,t•U.....,._NlfUlrttllltMtl,tt/tlt
E:x:aT.incr................... ,11,,,,,.,.u
- - .. _:.,_ =�
192
cognizable offence is made out. Therefore, th!;? cancellation report has been
prepared and it is requested that the same may please be accepted and the
I:;)'
case file may be consigned to record. The complainant has been informed
about the Final Report (cancellation).
18. Refer Notice Served IYesl !No Date

Acknowledgement to be placed
Dispatched on
119.1 I
Name .
Aclit�n
Rank lnsoector
No. D-919
PIS No.
16950107
Forijarding
Officer
Rank
Sh. Vikram Sinah ana�"�tP'
Assistant Commissioner of Police
Economic Offences Wing
Mandlr Mara: New Delhi
-34-
-;: :::;
T 1f�q �r"
;{ --�-�--- -;u-
r ATTEt1'EO
. 18 FFP r'l�
�am..................... , ... ,.. , .......J,,.,, •••
Exatnln-c· ....... ,.......... ::::...•:;:•,,
Annexure - J 193
COMPLAINT CASE No. 8/1/C OF 2014
IN THE MATTER OF:

VIRPAL SINGH & ANR. ... COMPLAINANT
0 VERSUS
Mis EROS RESORTS & HOTELS PVT. LTD. & Ors. . ..... ACCUSED
N:J), o .. H · 30. CJS.bJ./,

PROTEST PETITION AGAINST FINAL REPORT FILED FOR
CANCELLATION OF FIR NO. 80/2014 DATED 28.07.2014 BY THE
LO. OF E.O.W. CELL. WHICH WAS DIRECTED TO BE LODGED ON
THE DIRECTIONS OF PREDECESSOR COURT OF THIS HON'BLE
COURT AFTER APPLYING JUDICIAL MIND IN THE
ABOVEMENTIONED COMPLAINT CASE

0
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHO'WETH:
1. _That the above matter is pending before this Hon'ble Court and is
listed for 30.05.2016 for hearing on the cancellation request for
forgiveness report filed by the IO from the E.O.W. cell.
2. That the IO has filed his final report as cancellation report and thus
has requested that the case file may be consigned to record and said
j
,.-- . . . ·ti :·�'"[I1��
1
.,-:::- s·· ... ·:--:;�
194 -J"--�-
·.. : ----·� :>· _- ��-\itn:-t;R
{
\
"···-.,•· .... , . !I
• . .• . 1 I
.;
1·•1 �·
3. That it is submitted that the report of the IO is highly biased and the\ · , . _._. ·.· - ·
' .-.,,
_/
contents thereof are wholly dictated by the bosses at the accused \fJ;:\_C°i�J/
company in the same way which they have followed in cheating the
complainants i.e. bribing and illegal methods of gratifying the
concerned officers to achieve their objectives.
(S That in tenns of the language of the IO, it is submitted that through

this FINAL REPORT the IO is trying to give civil colour to a matter
which is prima facie criminal in the eyes of this Hon 'ble Court which
had ordered the registration of this FIR only after application of

0 judicial mind and the investigation conducted by LO. is insufficient
and biased in favour of the accused company and its officers due to
color of their money.
5. That inspite of so many reasons and causes of cheating and forgery in
the present complaint the IO could not see any one reason to charge
the accused person with criminal liability, this is the level of
investigation carried out by E.O.W and its appointed I.O. It is
0 noteworthy that the E.O.W or I.0. did not interrogated any of the
Director/chainnan of the accused company.
6. That inspite of a previous record of th� accused persons in FIR no.
F.I.R NO 245/11 registered in P.S (E.O.W) wherein also same kind
of allegations were proved by the complainants therein who were
then refunded their moneys by the accused company, it is surprising
that IO could not see any criminal indulgence of the accused persons.
Earlier in FIR No. 245/2011, which was also registered in P.S. E.O.W. Cell,
4
;�· . -·<�;!::�:� �
195 . ..--:i:,- .. ,,-n t'. '
-..;:
\:1-... ·;✓ -::,•.;_"·t· (# �
mvestors prior to getting the relief of quashing of FIR� that case from the\\ ;�:.., '¾"q-.;:-�'i ·G,, tt,
�S�'; �
Hon'ble High Court m Crl. M.C. No. 763/2012 the a�used persons settled
their matter with the complainap.t and as per final order dated 29.08.2013,
Hon'ble High Court observed that that the accused company and its directors
settled their matter with 9 other mvestors/buyers by reimbursmg their
amount · with interest and Hon'ble High Court also levied cost of Rs.
4,00,000/- (Rupees Four Lac Only) for quashing the proceedings against the
petitioners (Directors of Company) in order to maintain the peace in the

0 society. It was further mentioned in the order dated 29.08.2013 that this
quashing order shall not affect on the case of any other investor/s or buyers.
It is pertinent to mention here that at the time of quashing of said FIR, the
same E.O.W. cell was opposing the quashing of the FlR. against the same
accused person by saying that accused person had committed offence.
7. That it is submitted that h�d the complainants joined the said FIR as /
I
complainants they would have been rewarded with their refunds of
0
the money sucked up fraudulently by the accused company but as ----
stated in the complaint before this Hon'ble Court, the complainants
herein were once more fooled by the accused company by getting
their signature on fraudulent NOC drafted by the accused company
for the purpose of filing in the above said FIR no. 245/1 I registered
in P.S (E.O.W) to save their skin. ,..
8. That the IO has summarized his report in the form of a table on page 29 of
his report. The following table shall reply to each point ofthis table.
--- .. � l
196
5 --·:,0t
--•I--'"
1·.... ·--::- .,
. :,_ . ... .. . ·. �
·. . -·.
' ·,
\�,\; ·"l:\.:r.:_/:Y/,: �--�- i

. . ')
_l___A_s_p_ _r - -p-ly-r _ _ -iv_ _d_ _o_m_D_D_A_to�- -I-:-: -,- -=-e-::'.H::-0-

th e O th
--= ::-
te 1-s -=--bu--:i lt_o_n_tli�-' f �, ··.:,i,:i,: ·1:_;:
::-;-::i
e re e ce e fr ·:''.,'".· ,{· :.-
1/
-� {}{��-Y-�t>
clearly ,
two plots were linked to Common Wealth Games, this
established the allegations of the complainant that the project was
told to be completed before these Games 2010 so that the
investors shall get the benefit of footfalls of the foreign guests
who will stay in those hotels and buy from the shops allotted to
the investors. The project was promoted ad marketed in 2006 &
2007 and there was enough time before 2010 when the Games
were to be held. However in actual scenario neither the hotels
0 could be completed before Games or the shops got
allotted/completed before the games therefore the whole plan of
s
the cheme of investing in these shops at the rate of five/seven
times more than the market price was failed due to the cheating of
the accused company. It was only because of their promise of
delivery of completed shops before the arrival of the guests for the
games that the complainants had agreed to pay for the sky high
price of the shops. However it is sad that the IO could not see
0 false commitments of the accused persons in this game of
cheating in this manner because he is blindfolded by the mask of
the money thrown by the accused persons.
2.The IO could not corroborate the allegation that the single project
was subdivided into two projects arbitrarily because to his
understanding it was enough if the DDA had sold two different
separate plots to the accused persons/company. Was it not required
by him to ascertain whether the company had clearly e:xplained this

. -
fact to the buyers that the two plots will be constructed separately. It
197
bright spot on the skyline of Delhi as a Bouleward on the lines of
Dubai Malls but what has come out is a solitary building in a isolated
location of Delhi where even the road does not reaches clearly and
one has to make special effort to enter the shops area this decreases
the footfalls in the shops and resulting in a huge loss to the
complainants and others shopkeepers. All these facts lead to the
cause of cheating the complainants by the accused persons and is a
criminal action on the part of the accused persons.

0 The allegation that no five star hotel has been associated with
the project is clearly established by the investigation of the IO that
firstly the hotel was having contract with the Intercontinental but
later it changed to Hilton and presently again with the
Intercontinental. But it was clearly mentioned in the complaint that at
the time of booking the shops it was the hotel Intercontinental which
was shown to be the major attraction of this complex. If the said hotel
is not on location it amounts to breaking the promise and leading to

0 cheating crime being inflicted upon the complainant by the accused
company and its directors/employees/promoters/agents.
4, fl: It was alleged that the property was sold to different investors
at different rates and basic sale price was reduced to induce the
complainant to deposit the cash amount for buying the shops. The IO
has observed that the basic sale price in the application fonn was Rs
20000/- per sq. ft. However the IO could not see any element of
cheating in the practice of the accused company to sell at different
prices to different buyers which is against the law of the land and I
l
7
198 : : .. - . . ,·
plans and allotment were provisional.
5 4i It is alleged that the plan of construction existing is different
from what was assured. The variation in the plan was observed by the
IO. It was the original plan of the accused company that they will
first collect all the money from the investors by showing good
location of their shops and rosy picture on the provisional maps and
when their money will be deposited in the account of the accused

0 company these investors will be forced to agree to the changed
location of the shops due to locking of their huge money in the
accused company. The accused company has been able to achieve
exactly the same and cheated the complainant and other investors in
the process. The complainant like many other investors could not
resist the changing of the shops by the accused due to the fact that a
huge sum of money of all these investors was deposited with the
accused company. On the establishment of this fact alone i.e.
0 deliberately projecting two different project as a single project and
change of initial plan, the charge of cheating is liable upon the
accused company and its directors etc.
t a. It is an established fact that the completion certificate were

_
obtained by accused persons fraudulently from different departments
prior to inauguration of CWG. The IO received replies from various I .
Govt. departments and could not substantiate the allegation. This is
an_ important fact which needs to be investigated with a little more
degree of seriousness than shown by the IO because it involves a

199
huge number of high position government officials who took huge
sums of money or other forms of gratifications to throw away such
prime land of the capital region at low prices to the accused company
and even sold more than 33 hotel sites in the name of the CWG. This
is a time consuming exercise and needs extra effort on the part on
investigating agency. After Coomon Wealth Games, Shingloo
Committee gave the report that it was a calculated scam committed
with the active connivance of politicians, builders, hotel operators
and official of DDA and they firstly projecte� increased demand of
0 space/accommodation for the spectators expected from abroad in the
city from all over the world and then sold land at cheap prices to
hoteliers.
t. In reply to the report of the IO in para 7, the reply in above
para 6 may be taken as reply.
. � The employees of the accused company played in the hands of
the directors of the accused company because they were their
paymasters and they all had to say what was the plan of the company
0 to induce and cheat the investors. It was the duty of the IO to find out
through his investigating abilities as to what all were the wrong
undertakings and certificates given by the employees by taking their
submissions which were not taken because all the report contents
have been dictated by the accused directors of the company. Bad the
LO. recorded the statements of ny of the directors of he a�cused
company.
9. ,. The allegation that the company was bound to develop the
project prior to the CWG in accordance of the projected plan is the

-...-
. . · 200 .
16
main crux of the problem because the extraordinary amount of price
-
·)ss~~i~!;:
'\0:.s~<-;-.::-;.: ·,:.\.. ,/
·,\ ?)~~-\~-:~~;_?J:~·:;;'
paid for ordinary shops in a desolate location was agreed only upon
the rosy pictures shown by the accused company and its promoters of
the high level of footfalls of the high income group foreign visitors of
the CWG to give huge profits to the investors including complainant.
If the project has not been completed prior to CWG the whole
investment plan of the complainant has been. futile. It is reported by
the IO that only the hotel project was linked to CWG but that is a
created fact to save the accused company from any kind of charge-
0 sheet because when this established fact is seen in the light of
promises made through brochure, print media advertisements and
website of this project used to sell these high priced shops to
investors/complainant, the two things are correlated to establish that
the shops were also promised to be completed and delivered before
the start of CWG 2010. This correlation is en~~gh to establish the

\
cheating component of the crime perpetrated by the accused persons
\
upon the complainant.
0 j,e, i,Y' This is a real allegation which needs extra effort on the part of
"
the IO/investigating agency because the govt officials of high level
are involved in this racket oflancLgrabbing in the name of CWG. It is

"<
time consuming exercise but necessary to establish the nexus. The
complainant is unable to provide pr~of because of his limited
resources in this regard but it is not so for the investigating agency ·
which can get hold of such official documents as are necessary to

<!:..._
prove the same. The report of the IO is lacking on this aspect. Instead
of investigation into the matter he has only reported upon the

201
documents which are in the open public domain but he has refrained! .- .. .
<t:��'.\ j/
.,,, .. , Cc:n-tv . ,•�• • t, \ _!
n 4,..:
from in�esl\¥a�n1.; deep_ in:? th�alaise of corruption which was
--
··<·.-.-: · · · · :.-
involved in this game in the name of CWG. Especially in the light of
._.,,...,=•· • - iil!!!Wz-.:c►::ac. � :. ;p ,:e1I
I a •
the FIR no.

' 245/2011, P.S. E.O.W and its ultimate result the
investigation should have been deeper than reported.

---=· ·-- PsW WWW�W:Z fQl4ill�
jj,. � The 10 was not required to report upon the profit and loss
account of the accused company but he was required to search for the
elements of cheating into the allegation of the complainants and other
0 investors but only because he was guided by his superiors upon the
dictates of the directors of the accused comuany he reported on the CQ
financial loss of the accused company in this deal instead of
investig!_ting the charge of collecting huge money from public by the
.
ZUZ4. -- .- - .•
-
accused company .
with false- commitment and assurances. -
� d&. At last the IO has found something true in the allegations of
the complainant but that too only to describe the beauty of the
complex as described to him by the directors of the accused
company. The allegation was not that the hotel has not been
0 completed with shopping area but the allegation was with
i) respect to the timing of c,ompletion of the hotel with

. '
shopping facilities• which was to be completed before the
I
C\VGand
ii) the, location of the shops with respect to the original
allotment with all the buyers and
iii) the modus operandi of changing the shops of all the buyers
to extract extra money from each of them in the name of
PLC/increased surface area/ or any other reason.

202
y in
Th at the accused co mpan t Dire to Mana r/ ,
, is c rs, g g D irecto s
E mp loye e s an d Agen ts h h
e d in i din
ave c e at it s ors
ves t n c
lu
g
complaina nt by deception d itt e d i

an
c
o mm
fr
au d
b
y m s r senta on
epr e ti
there by induci ng the co m lain t to de li th ir h d d e

p an ver e ar earn e mon
y
m y fo bo k n xi ti al
to the accused persons/co i
pan n o s n
r o a n e V irtu
g g
shop by chargi ng an exorbit an t ri f Rs. 26 00 0/- (R

p ce o , upees nty
Tw e
S x Thousan ) per sq. feet by i

vi
n fal b
i d g g a se ass an
ur ce ased on
a
dec epti e virtu l visual p e s t ti in th fo f B s

v a r en a on e rm r chure
o
o ,
Coloure d & Attracti e Si te Plan s

, Ph
o
t d Com hi
v os an e
put r cs
grap
0 presenti ng it to be an attractive ly
s itu
a
t
e
d in th
e
b
est o
f
an u
pc o
mi ng
Mal l-cu
m -Five Star Hotel
s of Inte c tin tal in an
r on en terc nn
o ected with
Atrium, Escalator , Wate r Fa ll h Int i l S d n

s av in e rn
at ona tan ards. O
g
page 18-19 of the report of the LO., it i ti d th DD e

s men one at A mad
i mportant cha nges to the ap v

d
l f th m
co an
pro e p an o e
, the c
o many
p y p
made representation befor e the L.G. t k h in

o see 5 c anges
s
e
th
sanctioned pla
n vide letter dat d 20/09/2007 th d
as m
e co an
y
w an
te
e p
origina t tr Atri ll
to ad fron Entranc
e and c e
n al ri
d l um a s o ina
y
g
0 planned b y com pan y which was

pr o
mi
se
d t
o
th
e c o m
p
l
a
in
ant &
othe
r
investors but the DDA did not adh t th f th

er e o e r e u e
st o e co man .
q p y
Thereafte the com pa n y mad the c tru

c ti
on s er th d
r e ons a e chan e
g
p
entrance and without atrium in the finish d l h th h s

e co m ex w ere s
p op
e
were just no t as promised b the co Thi finding bli

y m an .
s esta shed
p y
the accusation of the comp lain

an t ag in th d h
a st e accuse w shoul d be
o
booked fo alleged offences. Thu s the h ti h s b l

r c e a ng a een wr
it ge on
ar
the face of the accuse d co d its .dir

mp any an os.
t r
e c
complainant t ith
13 & 14. The are
n o
c
once ed
rn w
th ll
a otment
of
e
203
the land and its timing to the accused company but they are
concerned with the timing of the completion of the shops
purchased by them and the timing as well as the conditions of
their delivery to the complainant as prime location for better
shopping bene;fits to the owners through their high profile
customers. The accused company etc had represented the complex
would be having a very high prospective value due to its assured
occupancy by Hotel Intercontinental and assured completion in
accordance of projected designs and graphics before the opening
0 of the XIX Commonwealth Games, 2010 i.e. before September
2010 and due to having scope of complete booking of hotel rooms
with foreign guests/visitors during the said games and therefore
there will be good business opportunity since beginning due to
having shop in big lobby area on its main entrance. However the
structure & shops as it exists in the present it all has turned out to
be non-existent and thus the cheating has been writ large on the
face of the accused company .
Believing upon the misrepresentation of accused company by

0 , IJY.'
giving a false assurances based on a deceptive visual presentation in
the form of Brochures, Coloured & Attractive Site Plans, Photos and
Computer graphics presenting it to be an attractively situated shops in
the best of an upcoming shopping arcade with big footfall in Mall
cum-Five Star Hotels of Inter Continental interconnected with an
.Atrium, Escalators, Water Fall having International Standards the
complainant had booked the high valued shops in this complex but
the application forms; terms and conditions; shop buyers agreement
t;!J - - - -
204
believing upon the false commitments and representations of the
company and its representatives, which were therefore taken for a
ride by the company after collecting huge amount from all the
investors. As per the law of the land it is a crime to deceive someone
by showing rosy pictures and false representation of something and
then give something else after collecting money for that product.
Specially when the accused company, its director/s, representatives
lmows that they were never entitle to construct two different

0 adjoining plots as a joint project and showing big waterfall in the
centre with atrium and escalators was false representation, cheating
�d criminal breach of trust on the part of accused persons.
Main entrance for shopping area also changed from front entrance of
hotel as earlier shown in the plans and entrance for shops given from
the back side, which is really very bad location and delinked from the
hotel area and presently existence of only liquor shop, which is
operational in the whole shopping area also clearly shows that no one
0 else can dare to open his business or shop due to the gentry comes to
buy liquor there and accused company and its representatives are not
allowing anyone for opening of another liquor shop in its own
interest as one of the buyer/complainant namely Sanjay Bhargava
requested to hand over the keys of the shop / purchased area so that
he may also let out his area/shop on rent to liquor shop operator,
' .
which is not acceptable to accused company in its own interest and
by not giving entrance from front side from the hotel entrance area
and disconnec,tmg. the conn:,:�vity from hotel completely by putting

i, I �r.::r;--::r:rrft-� I
.J."T
205
' • • I
' .·
�:: _:
..
permanent locks on the intervening entrance and now allowing \: · v,-,-_, ... ,,'
<_:_��--· _: :-.:/�--' .,
existing liquor shop accused company completely ruined the whole
project in its own interest and committed the offence of cheating,
frauds, misrepresentation, criminal breach of trust with its own
buyers as specified in the complaint/s.
16. The fact is proved that huge sums of money were given in
November 2006 and the agreements were entered into in year 2007
but the IO did not find any illegality and criminality in this operation
because he is not aware of the law of the land and thus he was
0
unaware that it may have involved theft of taxes in th.is whole process
by the accused company for which it should have been charge
sheeted.
17. The IO has found all the answers to all the charges in the replies
from DDA but he has not tried to find out as to how and why the _......._.
•--
•• •••
•
•
I __.._.,
DDA�s officials kept themselves mum when virtual plans were sold
,, ., ,--------..� ... =:.»�
by �c.<?�!��om��l.. and �ccused company failed to complete its

00
<:t �
0 project for which land in question was allotted to the accused

��l'�tl_......,. ,. vr r, ..o�,-.-.:,;i:r �-•-- ..... _ ..,... • · • · 1•n-��.--,.:V
company at much lesser rates from the reserved price for a specific
t gprtrtS � JU. I �---�---•- ...-.. . ,. __·;:a�-rft - .. -·•,·• · ··-.
� >··•��-�
�e and...��)7 -�e ��?� ��ated..�o take legal a�!�� !15t

the
...
...§;CCMS�.d- ...Go9JPP,fil!Y bx cancelling its allotment. Because, the
-
�•...!"..�:"°..�•- . � .... ...-1-•-·· •-·� .. .. .... •,,-$')-• ...,�. :�·--' ••-..,.,�.,.,
accused company failed to complete its project and fully constructed
and get it operational prior to Commonwealth Games within the
-stipulated period till Sept. 2010 and allowed the accused company to
sellout shops out of the ordinary rules for the accused company when
it is against the existent rules of the DDA to allow anyone to sell the
shops etc until ..aU .. the plans are sanctioned for building any
� f,
- ,�,
206
at that stage the investor will not be in a position to challenge the
company due to his huge money involved in the company and the
company will get profit from that. This is what the allegation is
that the company has played fraud with complainant by showing
something else about the shops and then hand over something else
0 in the name of beautiful mall. This is the charge which is proven
here.
. Believing upon the misrepresentation of accused company
'
by giv_ing a false !:!-ssuranc�s based on a deceptive visual
presentation in the form of Brochures, Coloured, & Attractive Site

. '
P lans, Photos and Compu�er graphics prese!}ting it . to be an

_
attractively situated shops in the best of an upcoming Mall-cum
Five Star Hotels of Inter Continental interconnected with an
Atrium, Escalators, Water Fall having International Standards the
complainant had booked the high valued shops in this complex

0 but the application forms; terms and conditions; shop buyers
agreement were made in the regular cyclostyle manner and the
investors believing upon the reputation of the company in Delhi
and all the structure created by the company in the past all over
Delhi never felt threatened by the cheating mechanism built in the
forms, agreements etc and were therefore taken for a ride by the
company after collecting huge amount from all the investors. As
per the law of the land it is a crime to deceive someone by
showing rosy pictures of something and then give something else
-·--r·T. :··:,�· ...... ;----, .... ..\.:.,....,...._.¥.-1.q._1j. -·- � �� - ..
, rr.::.:::···�i;-1w,lta1f 7
··-;-1J"':'-------:---�--�--:-·-·--��-=--"":"'·
f
.
207
giving a false assurances through their letter that the project will
be completed within 30 months i.e. before January 2010, the
complainant had booked the high valued shops in this complex
but the application forms; terms and conditions; shop buyers
agreement were made in the regular cyclostyle manner and the
investors belieying upon the false assurances of the company
complainant/s were never aware or felt threatened by the cheating

0
mechanism built in the forms, agreements etc and were therefore
taken for a ride by the company after collecting huge amount
from all the investors. As per the law of the land it is a crime to
deceive som~one by showing rosy pictures of something and then
give something else after collecting money for that product. After
investing huge money in this project the investors were not in a
bargaining position with the company which continued to exploit
them.
0 21. As per the reply above in para no 12 to 20
22. The shopping area has no entry from front area and not
constructed as per projected plans and in actuality it has been
closed permanently by the hotel management
23. Promise for assured rent is another promise which has been
...broken because it has not been written in the accused company's
arbitrary one sided agreements and bunch of cyclostyled documents
of agreements.
24. The buyers have been forced to agree on everything done by

17
208
the accused company because their money was at stake.
that stage the investor will not be in a position to challenge the
company due to his huge money involved in the company and the
company will get profit from that. This is what the allegation is that
the company has played fraud with complainants and other investors
by showing something else about the shops virtually like horse on
papers and then constructed something else like pony in the name of
0 beautiful shopping arcade in a five star hotel cum shopping mall.
These all are the charges which are proven here. Believing upon the
misrepresentation of accused company by giving a false assurances
based on a deceptive visual presentation in the form of Brochures,
Coloured & Attractive Site Plans, Photos and Computer graphics
presenting it to be an attractively situated shops in the best of an
upcoming Mall-cum-Five Star Hotels of Inter Continental
interconnected with an Atrium, Escalators, Water Fall having
International Standards the complainant had booked the high valued

0
shops in this complex but the application forms; terms and
conditions; shop buyers agreement were made in the regular
cyclostyle manner and the investors believing upon the reputation of
the company in Delhi and prior to know the actuality about the
structure created by the company in respect of project in question
complainants or other investors never felt threatened by the cheating
mechanism built in the forms, agreements etc and were therefore
taken for a ride by the company after collecting huge amount from all
-
209
r·rJ/··---{J f �.?.,
,��
,,,.-.. ,,c.r,....·Pol,1.
. ....��
. , ,..,, �
'(-. ' ' ! /·· -�-11Tt :._!,?,1_ :�
r,.. ...t.
, ,., , :f.. c\ c;) •
m-�-...... �P \
,...._e__v_ _s-tor- _ _ _ _e_ __ __al w_o_f__e_l__ _i__
t s
i _a_c_n_·m-e_t__
o d_e_c� � i
...... _,., � '. -· f 9 �� -,lo
th in e s. A s p r the th an d y ;
\.•·�'::_:;. �;\'.',.;; � .._, c>I
s�meone by showing rosy pictures of something and · then git�i �:"� ?..t;.'t- >f.f
��:� _. �l "// .
�:.. cy Sou\�_,,;i
[':,..__�-�
something else after collecting money for that product.
26. This is a very small aberration in the whole complaint which is
riot so significant but in the whole picture of disappointment, it is
·also a big issue which stops the complainant to run his shop.
9. That being aggrieved from the acts of the accused persons and further
from the way the BOW Cell conducted investigation, undersigned
complainant suffering very badly for the last several years and
0 accused persons are enjoying their lives very comfortably due to
having their high profile links and influenced the investigation and
LO. of the case and it may not be possible in any manner without
instructing the I.O. by the high ranked police officer from Delhi
Police or E.O.W. Cell, the complainants prefers this protest petition
against the false & evasive cancellation/ final report filed by the LO.
from E.O.W. Cell before this Hon'ble Court,
0 �not only the I.O. but the officer/s who approved the Final Report
in question are also liable to commit wrongs under the colour of their -
duty and without applying their minds approved the Final Report just
in order to facilitate and - help the accused persons, which clearly
show.s.that the J�O. a11g.-hi��r ranked o�cer were/are determinant to
help the accused persons and also liable t-O-R�?secute alongwith them.
PRAYER
It is therefore, most resp�,9tfu11y prayed beforetlg:_s i:[0n�b'le C-oin't.

,.•·
210
(i) To direct the E.O.W. cell to firstly changed the I.O. and
initiate departmental inquiry against the I.O. of the
case, who filed this wrong & evasive final report to
assist the accused persons and also direct to take the
. \
legal action against the

'
I.O.
. and the officer� who
direct�d the I.O. and influenced the investigation of
the case.
0-
(ii) To direct to reinstate the investigation in the light of
abovementioned facts & circumstances and arrest the
accused company's directors, officials,
representatives, who committed the offence of -
cheating, fraud and criminal breach of trust with the
innocent buyers.
(ii)To pass any other and further relief/order which this
0 Hon 1 ble Court deems fit and proper in accordance with the
facts & circumstances of the case so as to be in the interest
of justice as well as oft complainant/petitioner,
)
\ /
,(t\ Co�
VI�PAL SINGH & REENA SINGH
Through counsel
DELHI VINEET BAH
Advocates
DATED �Lf· C)5"-)b)t For PATH FINDER (INDIA) LAW FIRM™
3/115, RAMESH NAGAR, NEW DELHI-110015
CH. No. 108, W. WING, TIS HAZARI COURTS
(PH. 92100-92100)
.L
211
Annexure - K(Colly)
FIR No. 80/2014

PS BOW
S/V Cancellation Report
25.05.2016
Present: None.
File called fromAhlmad of the Court.

On 24.05.2016, Inspector Nirmal Kumar Jha,
Security approached Naib Court HC Rakesh Kumar in lunch time
seeking appointment 'With the court. Another Naib Court HG
Ishwar Pal informed undersigned regarding Inspector Nirmal
Kumar Jha wanting to meet him in Chamber. On inquiry, HG
Ishwar Pal informed undersigned that Inspector Nirmal Kumar Jha
0 is submitting that he knows this court but the court did nm:
remember any official of the said name. However, Inspector Nirmal
Kumar Jha was permitted to meet. Inspector N'rrmal Kumar Jha
came into Chamber of undersigned and told that he wants to say
something. On seeing him, underslgned recollected that Inspector
Nirmal Kumar Jha used to appear before undersigned in some
matter in Karkardooma Court. Inspector Nirma! Ku�f!-!: Jh.a
----
submitted that he has remained IO of FIR no.80/2014 BOW but that
- ·-
-
- .. - -- --�-
matter was later on investigated b}' IO Inspector Adi� Ranjan. He
submitted that he got information that Inspector Aditya Ranjan
who has filed cancellation report in the matter has taken money
from proposed accused in the matter in name of the court but that
money has not been yet given to this court. On an inquiry from
Inspector Nirmal Kumar Jha regarding his source of information.
he submitted that he will apprise this court after verification of the
0
same./ �,
/;',/;-¥
"ti;/
r
ct
212
t
✓ I
•.�-.... I .,...t' r
II�:::.
�� a.;tfl.
1_,Ji.
""' ""·
· . \
_ '.
Jff....--:.;§ =-""'
lo
if .•1
.,
!:.
-2- ••
.... ,,c,!
0r.:;·
,,,. o;f'
He however, submitted that cancellation report has C'o • �-� r;:,C\

been rightly prepared by IO Inspector Aditya Ranjan. He requested
that information given by him may not be divulged to anyone.
Thereafter, he left Chamber of undersigned.
Undersigned was shocked to listen to such mis
information being spread against him by a police official.
Undersigned brought this fact into notice of DCP, EOW Sh. B.K.
Singh on 24.05.2016 itself telephonically through mobile of Naib
Court HC Rakesh Kumar and asked him to make discreet inquiry in
this regard.
0
If IO Inspector Aditya Ranjan has taken money
0 from anyone in name of the court or even has asked for money in
name of the court from anyone, it is a serious issue and has
implications on integrity of undersigned. In case wrong
information has been given to this court, then also, it is a serious
issue.
Let copy of this order be sent to CP, Delhi
- --'--------�-- -- -�-----·------
- - --:-----�---
immediately with direction to inquire into the matter and file
report before this court on NDOH. Commissioner of Police, Delhi
is fur�er directed to take action against guilty official after inquiry.
Let receipt from office of Commissioner of Police,
Delhi be placed on record before NDOH. Let copy of order be sent
to CP, Delhi through Special Messenger today itself through DCP,
EOW. Be put up on date already fixed i.e. on 30.05.2016.,.. #,
( SonuAgnihotri)
0 Salcet Courts, New Delbii25.05.2016
213
FIR No. 80/2014

PS EO\V
State Vs. Cancellation Report
30.0S.2016
Ld. P.O is on half day leave before lunch.
Present: Shri Gyan Prakash, Ld. APP for State.

None for complainants.
IO Inspector Aditya Ranjan, EOW in person.
ACP L. C. Yadav, Vigilance on behalf of CP, Delhi.
IO seeks _time to file reply on protest petition filed by

.) complainants. Heard and allowed.
Be put up for further proceedin._. . on 09.06.2016.
ACP L. C. Yadav, Vigilance is directed to file report on
behalf of CP, Delhi in view of order dated 25.05.2016 for NDOH.
~arwal)
MM-03, South, Saket Courts, New Delhi
Link to Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (South)
Saket Courts, New Delhi/30.05.2016
)
,,.. .
214 )
~ L-
J..• • - - - ··---
Annexure - L
FIR No. 80/14

PSEOW
S/v. Cancellation
24.06.2016
Present: Sh. Gyan Prakash, ld. APP for the State.

ACP L. C.Yadav, Vigilance on behalf of1oint CP,
Security in person.
Sh. Indra Narain, proxy counsel for Sh. Vinit
Behl, counsel for complainants with complainant
Vupal Singh.
SI Bhagwan Singh on behalf ofIO InspectorAditya
Ranjan, BOW in person.
Order of Joint CP, Security filed by ACP L. C. Yadav.

Perused. As per order, regular DE against Inspector Ninnal Kumar
0 0
Jha has been ordered to be conducted.
Reply to protest petition filed by SI Bhagwan Singh
on behalf ofIO Inspectpr Aditya Ranjan. Copy supplied.
In view of order dated 25.05.2016, I am of the view
that I should not further try present matter any further.
lv,[atter is transferred to court of Sh, Sandeep Garg,
Ld. ACMM, South for disposal in accordance with law for
30,06.2016 at 10:00 AM..,., fY"
CSonuAgnihotri)
Saket Courts, NewDelbi/24,06,2016
.<)
0
215
Annexure - M(Colly)
flR ,\o. 8(;/201-!
PSEOW
29.01.2016
Fresh cancellation report has been filed. It be checked and registered.
Present: Dr. Sharawan Kumar, ld. Substinne APP for the State.
It is stated that the connected complaint case is fixed for

0-1. 0-l.2016.
Put up fur cuI1sicleraliun uu 04.04.201 G.
)
IO be sununoned for the next date of i.earing.
r
( Di, Saw·ah~tha)
216
FIR No. H0/14

PS EOW
S/V Cancellation
04 .U-LWlu
Present : Shri Mayank Tripathi, Ld. APP for State.

Sh. Vineet Behl, counsel for complainants and
,ictims Sanjay Bhargav and Radha Bhargav
with cumpldimml \'ir Pal Singh.
Sh. Raj Pal Kasam1., L:uuu:sd fur vklirn
/ Saras Kumar Sadh anrl Ashish K11m:=ir Saclh with
victim Saras Kumar Sadh.\
Request of IO perused and ai·' wed in the interest of

justice for today only.
Counsels for complainants and victims have
submitted that they have not received copy nf r.:rnr.P.llation report
t11ecl by IO. Heartl.
Naib court c111.1cen1t~J has s11bmi11ed that copy of
r.anrc•llation report for complainants and victims has been given by
IO Lu him. Heard. The same are supplied to counsels for
complainants as well as victims.
Hr:> put up for filing of protest petition if any by
complainc1nrs nnrl victims tor NDOH.
Issue no Lice lo IO to appear in person for
) 30.05.2016.
/!
( Sonu Agnihotri)
217
FIH No. 80/2014

PSEOW
State Vs. Cancellation Report
30.05.2016
Ld. P.O is on half day leave before lunch.
Present : Shri Gyan Prakash, Ld. APP for State.

None for complainants.
10 lnspecror Aditya Ranja..i, EOW in person.
ACP L. C. Yadav, Vigilance on behalf of CP, Delhi.
IO seeks time to file reply on protest petition filed by

complainants. Heard and allowed.
Be put up for further proceedin~·-. on 09.06.2016.
ACP L. C. Yadav, Vigilance is directed to file report on
behalf of CP, Delhi in view of order d:ited 25.05.2016 for NDOH.
~arwalJ
MM-03, South, Saket Courts, New Delhi
Link to Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (South)
Salcet Courts, New Delhi/30.05.2016
--· --
·-····,· -+••·
' •.
,.]) " '' I
i ,.,_,,,J jUN 1n77
218
FIR No. 80/14

PSEOW
S/v. Cancellation
24.06.2016
Present: Sh. Gyan Prakash, ld. APP for the State.

ACP L. C. Yadav, Vigilance on behalf ofJoint GP,
Security in person.
Sh. Indra Narain, proxy counsel for Sh. Vinit
Behl, counsel for complainants vvith complainant
Virpal Singh.
SI Bhagwan Singh on behalf ofIO Inspector Aditya
Ranjan, EOWin person.
Order of Joint CP, Security filf "."' by ACP L. C. Yadav.

Perused. As per order, regular DE against Inspector Nirmal Kumar
Jha has been ordered to be conducted.
Reply to protest petition filed by SI Bhagwan Singh
on behalf of IO Inspector Aditya Ranjan. Copy supplied.
In view of order dated 25.05.2016, I am of the view
that I should not further try present matter any further.
Matter is transferred to court of Sh. Sandeep Garg,
Ld. ACMM, South for disposal in accordance with law for
30.06.2016 at 10:00 AM.,,, ~
( Sonu Agnihotri)
) . '
219
FIR No. 80/M

PS EOW
30 06.2016
Case received by way of transfer. It be checked and registered.
Present: Sh. Narender Yadav. Ld. APP ior the State.
One of the complainant Sh . Veer Pal Singh in person.
lnsp. Aditya Ranian is absent and departmenlal inquiry has
already been initiated against him .
Re-notify for argumen1s on protest petition on 02.08,2016 .

, · -. -- ~ -lr -
(Sandeep Garg)
AC 1·J;Vt (South),
Net Delhi/30.06.2016
-----··
I
220
Case Nn. 2036672/2016

FIR Ko. 80/2014
State Vs. Cancellation
PS CO\V South
05.03.2019
Today I am working as link of Ld. CMM and my Ld. Predecessor

has also listed some mntt.crs for 04.03.2019 on the previous date.
04.03.20 {9 was declared holiday.
Present: Sh. Gyan Chand Soni, Ld. APP for the State.
)
None for the complainant.
Presence of IO is required for clarificati, -;1:::.

List on 27.03.2019.
1
(Harjy)Singh Bhalla)
AC~1f-..~/.(South),
New D~lhi/05.03.2019
I
.q' :".,
:.•r;/
I
f
I
·r·
I
' ' t
L: i·_.,•• \.I
. t' - ·~-- · - '
1
• • ··- \ . '
I
'
I
........ ' i
221
Case No. 2036672/2016

FIR No. 80/2014
State Vs. Cancellation
PS EOW South
:n.03.2019
I am functioning with only one Stenographer.
Present: Sh. Gyan Chand Soni, Ld. APP for the State.
Complainant with counsel Sh. Rajpal Ka~ana.
At request, list for 20.04.2019.

IO be summoned for the next date.
17
1
(Harjy~
t S ngh Bhalla)
ACMM (S uth),
New Del/ 27.03.2019
_)
----
222
Case No. 2036672/2016

STATE Vs. Cancellation
FIR No. 80/14
PS EOW South
20.04.2019
Present: Ld. Substitute APP for the State.

None.
)
IO be summoned for 06.06.2019.
f',
(Harjyot)Singh ;: ,1alla)
ACMM i(Souch;1
New De/lhi/20.04.2019
II
223
CR Cases 2036672/:W ! 6
STATE V,:,. EROS RESORTS AND HOTELS PVT LTD. AND ORS.
(CANCELLATION)
FIR no. 80 /2014 tEOW SOUTH)
26.02.2010
Present: Sh. Pravesh Vyas, Ld. APP for the State.

Sh. Ruhit Kumar Tripathi & Ivls. Yuhina Sangha, Ld.
Counsel(s) for the complainant.
All accused in person except accused Raman Sood.
Ld. Counsel for accused Raman Sood.
) lncharge VB EOW in person.

It is submitted by Ld. Counsel for the accused Raman Sood
that he has been served, however, he has been granted exemption from
personal appearance till next date of hearing by Hon'ble High Court.
IO Aditya Ranjan is absent despite service. Issue BW against
him in the sum of Rs. 5000/-.
Ld. Counsel for the complainant Virpal Singh and Reena Singh
submits that they wants to place on record one compilation in
furtherance of last submission made by Sr. Counsel, Sh. H. S. Bhullar.
On being asked as to whether it is in form of protest petition,
Id. Counsel for the complainant submits that the same is not. He
submits that same is to bring facts and documents on record and seek
) direction of change of investigating offic( 0

md further to direct
independent investigation against the investigaL,:.g officers.
Without being forwarded by the Ld. APP, any application or
' .' ,--

. (' ,•
~ • It - I•• ' • : ~ i. 4 o o I• I.• o •
224
Jocumeul filed by the complainant cannm he taken on record. So the
l-ounsel for the complainant to get the same lorwarded from Ld. APP or
show iegal provision on the NDOH whid1 allow the complainant to
move any application at any stage without :-.ame being forwarded by
L<l. Al'P.
Bail bonds and surety bonds in term of last order furnished.
Accepted. Be liste<l for supplying the:: rnpy uf 1cport u/S 173 Cr PC on
18.03.2020.
f//
lAnkit~i n)
~
ACM!\ ( uth),
New · elhi/26.02.2020
At this stage, IO Aditya Ranjan appeared in person and

apprised uf the order pas~ed above today. /4~-
(Anki /;Jngla)
ACM,~~outh),
New DelhU26.02.2020
'j l
Ii .'·,
'
1 j .i.
,.,
225
Annexure - N
226
Annexure - O
227
Annexure - P (Colly)
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
Annexure - Q
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
Annexure - R
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
Bhullar Law Firm <bhullarlawfirm@gmail.com>
Service of Petition Under Section 482 of Cr.P.C filed by Sarash Kumar Sadh in the
Matter of Sarash Kumar Sadh and Ors. v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi
1 message
Bhullar Law Firm <bhullarlawfirm@gmail.com> Tue, Nov 29, 2022 at 9:04 PM

To: dhcprosecutiondelhipolice@gmail.com
Dear Sir,
Please find the attached copy of the Petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure filed on behalf of Sh.
Sarash Kumar Sadh in the matter of Sarash Kumar Sadh and Ors. v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi.
Kindly Consider this email as Proof of Service.
Sarash Kumar Sadh & Ors vs Govt. of NCT of Delh...
--
BHULLAR LAW FIRM

Advocates & Legal Consultants
E-69,Greater Kailash Enclave-1
New Delhi-110048
email-bhullarlawfirm@msn.com
Tel +911141635435 Fax +911141635436
Disclaimer:
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to
whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the sender and delete the mail
immediately. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not
necessarily represent those of the company. Finally, the recipient should check this email and any attachments for the
presence of viruses. The company accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email.

Sarash Kumar Sadh & Ors Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sarash Kumar Sadh & Ors Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

TO BE FILLED ,BY HAND KINDLY FILE ADDL MEMO OF PARTIES I I LISTING PROFORMA I Page 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI I

NAM~ lslAIRIAk.lHI l1<lu.lMlekl l.s IAlblHI ~lwl.nl le lrzlsl PLA1NTIFF /

1 (a) Case Cate.gory CRL

2 (a) Case Type /Number

4 Statute Involved III I I I I I I·1 I I I l IIIIIIII

IN THE MATTER OF:

GOVT.OF NCT OF DELHI ... RESPONDENT

of India to Consider previous investigation conducted in

24. Application Under Section 482 Cr.P.C Seeking

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

IN THE MATTER OF:

All parties have been served.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHi

IN THE MATTER OF:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NE\V DELHI

IN THE MATTER OF:

2. Mr. Ashish Kumar Sadh

3. Mr. Virpal Singh

4. Mrs. Reena Singh

5. Mr. Sanjay Bhargav

6. Mrs. Radha Bhargav

Standing Counsel (Criminal)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

IN THE MATTER OF:

I y}1dersigned and tohl that he wants to sav something. On seeing him.

the company, the Complainant should explore the possibility of an

r- Fresh InvestigaLion should be done after ~ant:ellation of investigation

I Hence, the present petition praying for the same.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHi

IN THE MATTER OF:

2. Mr. Ashish Kumar Sadh

3. Mr. Virpal Singh

4. Mrs. Reena Singh

5. Mr. Sanjay Bhargav

6. Mrs. Radha Bhargav

PETITION UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL

A. DIRECT RESPONDENT TO CONDUCT 'FRESH/DE NOVO

1. THE NATURE OF THE INVESTIGATION CARRIED OUT BY

2. IN ORDER TO HELP THE ACCUSED, NIL INVESTIGATION

3. NO ATTEMPTS WERE MADE TO COLLECT EVIDENCE, NO

B. ISSUE/PASS ANY OTHER ORDER(S) OR DIRECTION(S) THAT

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

2. The brief facts of the present case are as followed: -

2.1.That around October-November 2006, the company through its directors,

2.13. On 20.03.2014 Ld. CMM, South passed an order in FIR No.245/2011,

2.16. That in 2014-2015 INVESTIGATING OFFICER Nirmal Kumar Jha

"During investigation it is also revealed that the Complaints of the

2.18. That the concluding remark by IO Aditya Ranjan brings to us a

2.19. Aggrieved by the fact that INVESTIGATING OFFICER Aditya

"On 24.05.2016, inspector Nirmal Kumar Jha, Security approached Naib

A True Copy of Order dated 26.10.2021 passed by Hon'ble High Court of

VL BECAUSE the closure report submitted by the Investigating officer is biased

"On 24.05.2016, inspector Nirmal Kumar Jha, Security approached Naib

Aditya Rw1jan. He submitled that he got i:iformwion that Inspector Adirya

NIL INVESTIGATION vVAS CARt"'UED OUT BOTH THE IO'S: -

III. BECAUSE a nil investigation was conducted by the Investigating Officers in

MALAFIDE INTENTION ON PART OF THE IO AND HIS SUPERVISING

80/20 i 4 without ...:onducting any effective investigation. tried to save the

IO'S TRYING TO GIVE COGNIZABLE OFFENCE A CiVIL COLOUR: -

AUTHORITIES RELIED UPON:-

investigation' and even transfer cases to courts of higher jurisdiction which

35. The power to order/direct 'reinvestigation· or 'de novo' investigation falls