9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (3) TMI 736X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s shall be stayed depends upon the fact and circumstances of each case. [See M.S. Sheriff v. State of Madras [ 1954 (3) TMI 76 - SUPREME COURT] and Iqbal Singh Marwah v. Meenakshi Marwah [ 2005 (3) TMI 750 - SUPREME COURT] . It is furthermore trite that Section 195(1)(b)(ii) of the Code of Criminal Procedure would not be attracted where a forged document has been filed. It was so held by a Constitution Bench of this Court in Iqbal Singh Marwah [ 2005 (3) TMI 750 - SUPREME COURT] The impugned order, therefore, cannot be sustained which is set aside accordingly. Civil Appeal arising out of SLP (C) is allowed. We, however, are of the opinion that the High Court should be requested to hear the appeal as early as possible and preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. This, however, may not be taken to mean that we have entered into the merit of the matter. It goes without saying that the respondent shall be at liberty to take recourse to such a remedy which is available to him in law. We have interfered with the impugned order only because in law simultaneous proceedings of a civil and a criminal case is permissible. He ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... int on 05.12.2002. Therefore, these circumstances also render the oral evidence of P.W.1 and P.W.2 highly doubtful on this aspect. Therefore, in these circumstances I find that the evidence of D.W.4 and the contents of Ex.C.4 opinion and Ex.C.5 reasons for opinion are sufficient to prove that the signature of D.W.1 is forged in Ex.A.15. Therefore in the circumstances it shall be held that the contention of the plaintiff and the evidence of P.W.1 that on 18.09.2002 he paid ₹ 4,03,000/- towards part of sale consideration and D.W.1 delivered possession of plaint schedule theater to him is not true. Therefore, in the circumstances it also shall be held that the plaintiff failed to prove that he came into possession of the plaint schedule property in pursuance of the part performance of the contract covered by Ex.A.4. It was furthermore opined: Therefore, following this decision of the Honourable High Court of Andhra Pradesh it shall be held that the plaintiff, since failed to prove that he paid ₹ 4,03,000/- towards part payment of sale consideration of D.W.1 and she delivered possession of plaint schedule to him on 18.09.2002 and passed Ex.A.15 receipt. It shall be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a serious illegality in staying the investigation of a criminal case. 10. Mr. P.S. Narsima, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant in Civil Appeal arising out of SLP (C) No. 16215 of 2006, would submit that keeping in view the observations made by the learned Trial Judge and furthermore in view of the fact that the respondent had not approached the court with clean hands, no interim order in his favour should have been passed. 11. Mr. Bhaskar Gupta, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent, on the other hand, submitted that the court has power to grant injunction even in respect of a proceeding which is stricto sensu not the subject matter of the proceedings before the High Court. 12. The High Court indisputably is a final court of fact. It may go into the correctness or otherwise of the findings arrived at by the learned Trial Judge. A' fortiori it can set aside the findings of the court below that the Ex. A.15 is a forged document or its authenticity could not be proved by the respondent. 13. It is, however, well-settled that in a given case, civil proceedings and criminal proceedings can proceed simultaneously. Whether civil pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ve been intended by Parliament. Sometimes, however, there are overriding reasons for applying such a construction, for example, where it appears that Parliament really intended it or the literal meaning is too strong. In regard to the possible conflict of findings between civil and criminal court, however, it was opined: 32. Coming to the last contention that an effort should be made to avoid conflict of findings between the civil and criminal courts, it is necessary to point out that the standard of proof required in the two proceedings are entirely different. Civil cases are decided on the basis of preponderance of evidence while in a criminal case the entire burden lies on the prosecution and proof beyond reasonable doubt has to be given. There is neither any statutory provision nor any legal principle that the findings recorded in one proceeding may be treated as final or binding in the other, as both the cases have to be decided on the basis of the evidence adduced therein It was concluded: 33. In view of the discussion made above, we are of the opinion that Sachida Nand Singh has been correctly decided and the view taken therein is the correct view. Section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ceiver or may make any other interim arrangement as to possession or user of the property which is the subject-matter of proceedings in the civil court exercising the power conferred on it by Sections 94 and 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure. It was, therefore, a case where this Court quashed a proceeding under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure as the matter pending before it arose out of a civil proceedings. Such observations were made keeping in view the fact that possession of the parties over the property in suit was in question. 17. The impugned order, therefore, cannot be sustained which is set aside accordingly. Civil Appeal arising out of SLP (C) No. 15670 of 2006 is allowed. 18. We, however, are of the opinion that the High Court should be requested to hear the appeal as early as possible and preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. This, however, may not be taken to mean that we have entered into the merit of the matter. 19. It goes without saying that the respondent shall be at liberty to take recourse to such a remedy which is available to him in law. We have interfered with the impugned order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
