prima facie is that such an agreement is statement to be executed and the flats were purchased, there was an allotment letter and, thereafter, there has been payment by cheques. The flats were to be handed over in 2007. However, the flats were not given to the complainant and the possession of the flat No.102 was given to one Pradnya Desai and that of flat No.103 to one Anandasan. Thus, the allegations are that the flats which are meant for the complainant and her husband were sold to third parties. The very fact that the builders then approached the complainant and stated that they would give four flats, prima facie, indicates that the builders admit that there was a transaction as between the petitioner and complainant. Thereafter, what has been narrated is that in terms of this agreement and in relation to distinct flats as well, the accused have cheated the complainant. They have not given the flats to the Complainant and there are internal disputes between partners of the Builder Firm. What has been pointed out by the complainant in her statement is that the third
