IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No. 346 of 2003 Date of decision : 16.11.2009 Surinder Singh ....Petitioner Versus C.J.M., Jagdhari and others ...Respondents **** CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. D. ANAND Present: Mr. Robin Dutt, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. V.K.Sachdeva, Advocate for respondent no.3. S. D. ANAND, J. Learned counsel for the petitioner and respondent no.3 have made the following statement:- “It is agreed that respondent no.3 does not dispute the liability to pay the amount represented by the cheque under reference. However, since the company itself has already been wound up, the petitioner would not proceed against the person of the respondent no.3. The petitioner would be entitled to lodge a claim with the liquidator and have whatever falls to his shale in the liquidation proceedings. The petition may be disposed of in terms of this consensual statement.” The petition shall stand disposed of in the light of the above quoted consensual statement accordingly. November 16, 2009 (S. D. ANAND) Pka JUDGE