Order 3

Order Details: Other
Pdf Text: CS No. 100706/2021 Renwat– Gammon Exh. 25 1 / 3
Further Examination in chief of defendant witness Jayesh
Sahal on oath by Adv. S. M. Khaire, for defendant
Plaintiff counsel Adv. Pankaj Shah present.
1) Affidavit now shown to me bears my signature. Its
contents are true. It is already marked as Exh.25. I have filed
following document on record. Same be allotted Exhibit mark.
Exh.26 : Letter of Authority Dt. 09.02.2023.
Exh.27 : Resolution Dt. 09.02.2023.
Further examination in chief is over :
Cross-examination by Adv. Pankaj Shah
2) I am graduated in Accounts. I am having B.Com
Degree. My Affidavit contains 18 paragraph. Most of them are
based on my personal knowledge. I am working with defendant
since 1999. In year 1999, I joined as Junior Accountant. Now, I
am working as Assistant Manger- Account. Being on that post, I
am aware of transaction. I don’t know the plaintiff. I say that, we
have made entire payment of the Goods which were purchase
during 2011 to 2014 from the plaintiff.
3) At this stage the plaintiff has confronted ledger to the
witness. The defendant counsel objected that, the witness can not
be confronted with Ledger in that manner.
4) Plaintiff is directed to file application with the
documents.
5) On oral request of plaintiff Matter is adjourned.
ROAC
MUMBAI
Dt. 28.08.2023
(Vijay S Hingne)
District Judge, Court Room No. 31
City Civil & Sessions Court, Mumbai
-- 1 of 3 --
CS No. 100706/2021 Renwat– Gammon Exh. 25 2 / 3
Cross-Examination of Jayesh Sahal on oath by Adv. Pankaj
Shah, for plaintiff.
Defendant Counsel S.M. Khaire and Ramesh Sahu present.
6) I do not remember the exact amount, which I have paid
to plaintiff during 2011 to 2012.
7) I do not remember the exact amount, which I have paid
to plaintiff during 2012 to 2013.
8) I do not remember the exact amount, which I have paid
to plaintiff during 2013 to 2014.
9) I do not remember the exact amount, which I have paid
to plaintiff during 2014 to 2015.
10) True to say that, till 01.07.2017, India was having Value
Added Tax (VAT). True to say that, it was replaced by Goods
Service and Tax (GST ).
11) Whether, the Suit transactions will attract VAT, on that,
I say, I will have to verify. The VAT is to be paid by the seller. I
am not aware about Commercial Tax Portal.
12) True to say that, Exh.15 which is
Confirmation Letter, bears seal of Gammon India. Now I say that,
-- 2 of 3 --
CS No. 100706/2021 Renwat– Gammon Exh. 25 3 / 3
seal is not of Gammon India. The Project Code of Gammon India
is 8917, Surat. Witness volunteers that, he will have to confirm it.
I can't identify the signature adjacent to the seal, at Exh.15. Not
true to say that, said signature belong to employee of Gammon
India. It is not possible for me to ascertain whether there is
employee by name Kapil. I have no knowledge about the signature
as Kapil and any such employee. Not true to say that, I am falsely
denying the seal and signature of Gammon India at Exh.15.
13) Not true to say that, I am still under liability of Rs.
9,94,709/- as stated in Confirmation Letter at Exh.15.
14) Not true to say that, I have no knowledge about the
dispute, transactions, invoices. Not true to say that, I am deposing
false.
Cross-examination of defendant : Over
Re-examination : Declined
ROAC
MUMBAI
Dt. 25.09.2024
(Vijay S Hingne)
District Judge, Court Room No. 31
City Civil & Sessions Court, Mumbai
Mazgaon.
-- 3 of 3 --