Interim Order 1

Order Details: Copy of Document.
Pdf Text: 10 C.C.No.808/SS/2018
CW-01 Exh.05
20. Whatever stated by me in my evidence affidavit is true
and correct and in token thereof I have signed the affidavit.
(M. P. Saraf)
Date : 24.08.2023 Metropolitan Magistrate,
58th Court, Bandra, Mumbai.
Cross examination of CW-01 Mrs. Sunita Jain by advocate
Mr. Prakash Gaharge for the accused :
21. I am not doing any business. I am freelancer of
beautician Hair dresser. I earned approximately Rs.40,000/- per month
from the business of beautician. I am running said profession since last
30 years. I am knowing accused since the day when I went to his home
for seeing home to purchase it. There was an advertisement as to the
sell of flat by the accused. I was told that the accused and his sister
Sumitra Thakkar are the owners of the flat. The deal to purchase said
flat was done through broker in the month of Nov. 2016.
Rs.1,59,30,000/- was agreed as a consideration for purchasing said flat.
The transaction took place at the end of month of Nov. 2016. There was
no written terms and condition finalized at that time.
22. I gave the cheque of Rs.1,51,000/- as a token to accused
in the name of his sister Sumitra Thakkar. It was decided and agreed in
between us to pay Rs.1,00,35,000/- by agreement and remaining
amount was to be paid in cash. No agreement was executed at all. I
paid cash amount of Rs.3,80,000/- to Pramod Thakkar, husband of
Sumitra Thakkar at the instance of accused. I did not obtained receipt
of payment made in cash. I gave total four cheques of amount
Rs.2,50,000/-, Rs.17,50,000/-, Rs.33,49,000/- including the cheque of
Rs.1,51,000/- to the accused. I also paid cash of Rs.6,50,000/- to
-- 1 of 3 --
11 C.C.No.808/SS/2018
CW-01 Exh.05
Sumitra Thakkar at the instance of accused. The three cheques for
Rs.2,50,000/-, Rs.17,50,000/-, Rs.33,49,000/- might be given in the
name of Sumitra Thakkar or Dilip Karia. I do not remember exactly
which cheque is given in whose name. Out of them two cheques of
Rs.2,50,000/- and Rs.17,50,000/- were encashed. I can not tell in
whose account the cheque was encashed. It is true to say that the
cheque of Rs.33,49,000/- was dishonoured. MOU was not prepared.
The accused did not give response for preparing MOU. It is not true to
say that I cancelled the deal. I made police complaint against the
accused after period of one year. The advocate for accused is warned to
restrict the questions to the defence instead of putting gossiping
questions to the witness. Accused gave me cheque in question in the
month of May 2017 after filing complaint. Dilip Karia gave me total six
cheques. It is true to say he gave me the cheques in the police station.
As the accused admitted to pay the amount I accepted the cheques of
accused. It is not true to say that police took the cheques and gave it to
me. It is true to say that the dishonoured cheque of Rs.33,49,000/- was
given from the account of my husband to the accused. It is true to say
that cheque of Rs.1,51,000/- was also paid through account of my
husband to Sumitra Thakkar. It is true to say that whatever amount
paid by me was paid to Sumitra Thakkar. It is not true to say that entire
payment is made by my husband and I have filed false case against the
accused Dilip Karia. It is not true to say that the cheques were received
under threat by the police. It is not true to say that the accused Dilip
Karia is not at all aware about the deal of sell of flat nor he was present
at any time. It is true to say that I cancelled the deal of purchasing flat
and also informed to the society. It is not true to say that I have not
made any transaction with accused Dilip Karia. It is not true to say that
-- 2 of 3 --
12 C.C.No.808/SS/2018
CW-01 Exh.05
I forcefully obtained the cheques in police station from the accused. It
is not true to say t hat I do not possess any proof to show parting cash
amount to the Sumitra Thakkar. I have produced the paper on which
the same is mentioned. It is not true to say that there was no
transaction taken place in between me and accused Dilip Karia. It is
not true to say that I have filed false case against the accused.
Cross examination is over.
No Re-examination. R.O.A.C.
(M. P. Saraf)
Date : 24.08.2023 Metropolitan Magistrate,
58th Court, Bandra, Mumbai.
J.O.Code :MH01362
CERTIFICATE
I affirm that the contents of this P.D.F. file evidence are same, word to word as per
the original evidence.
Name of Stenographer : Mrs. Aditi Ravikiran Dalvi
Court : Metropolitan Magistrate, 58th Court, Bandra,
Mumbai.
Dictated in open court on : 24.08.2023.
Typed on : 24.08.2023.
Evidence printed and Signed on : 24.08.2023.
Order Uploaded on : 24.08.2023.
-- 3 of 3 --