Rakesh Ranjan Prasad, J. - (1.) MR . Nanda, learned counsel submits that when a prayer, made by the petitioners of Cr. M.P. No. 589/2012 (O.P. Nos. 2 & 3 herein) before the Court below for release of 5 Hywa Tipper vehicles bearing registration Nos. JH 05 AD - 8172, JH -05 AD 8127, JH 05 AF -8712, JH 05 AD -8721 and JH -22 AO -441 and two Pocklain Machines PC -200 excavators, which were seized in connection with Sidgora P.S. Case No. 6 of 2012, was rejected, they moved to this Court vide Cr. M.P. No. 589/2012, against the order passed by the Court below rejecting the prayer for release. This Court, vide its order dated 04/05/2012 read with order dated 13/07/2012, passed an order for release of the aforesaid five vehicles as well as two Pocklain machines in their favour. Thereafter, the petitioners by furnishing the said order before the Court below, made a prayer for passing release order. The Court below accordingly, passed the order for its release and sent the order before the concerned police station but the police did not release the vehicles keeping in view the order passed by the Calcutta High Court, whereby the Calcutta High Court had passed an order for appointment of a receiver, who was supposed to take possession of the aforesaid five vehicles. When the vehicles were not released, a contempt petition was filed vide Cont (C) No. 31/2013. At the same time, the financier, who had financed the petitioners to purchase the aforesaid five vehicles, moved to this Court by filing this application (Cr. M.P. No. 400/2013), whereby prayer had been made for modification of the order passed on 04/05/2012 read with order dated 13/07/2012.
(2.) UPON hearing on the modification application, an order was passed whereby the operation of the order dated 04/05/2012 read with order dated 13/07/2013, concerning five vehicles, numbers of which have been mentioned herein above, was stayed. But, now the parties, i.e. the finance company and O.P. Nos. 2 & 3, have entered into a compromise, whereby dispute has been settled and in terms of the agreement, O.P. Nos. 2 and 3 are supposed to make payment of Rs. 1,03,71509/ - as on 25/05/2013 and as against that an amount of Rs. 10,00,000/ - has already been paid and further a sum of Rs. 93,71,509/ - is to be paid to the finance company and for such payment even the post dated cheques have been given and in such situation, the finance company has agreed not to object in getting the aforesaid five vehicles released in favour of them. But, at the same time, stipulation is there under the agreement that whenever, O.P. Nos. 2 & 3 would make default in making payment or the cheques are dishonoured, the finance company -petitioner will have right to repossess the vehicles. Apart from that other terms are also there, which are to be carried out by the parties. In that view of the matter, no further order needs to be passed in this application (Cr. M.P. No. 400/2013). Accordingly, this application stands disposed of. Consequently interim order of stay passed on 28/02/2013 stands vacated. In the result, the order passed on 04/05/2012 read with order dated 13/07/2012 in Cr. M.P. No. 589/2012 is to be carried out forthwith by the concerned persons.;