Order 2

Order Details: Copy of Document.
Pdf Text: 15 C.C.No.1087/SS/2018
CW01 Exh.08
24. 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 : 02.08.2023 Metropolitan Magistrate,
58th Court, Bandra, Mumbai.
Cross examination of CW01 by advocate Mr. Stayendra Sharma for the
accused :
25. I am bachelor of Engineering. The complainant company is
private limited company since year 1999. It is true to say that I have not filed
a Certificate of Registration of Company. It is not true to say that the
company being not registered I have not produced the Certificate of
Registration. At present there are only two directors of the complainant
company. Initially there were four directors. In the year 2017, there were
four directors of the company. I can tell names of directors. Hemant Parekh,
Prashant Parekh, Kala Parekh and Dipali Parekh were the directors in the
year 2017. The complainant company is running the business of iron and
steel products. It is not true to say that the company is not manufacturing
company. Our company is trading as well as manufacturing company. Our
company has maintained the account books relating to transaction with the
accused for the year 2017. We have also maintained minutes book and
resolution book of the year 2017. I have not brought today with me the
minute books of the meeting dated 17.05.2018. But I can produce it. It is not
true to say that no meeting of directors board of the company ever taken
place on 17.05.2018. It is not true to say that I am not at all authorised to
present the complaint in the alleged meeting dated 17.05.2018. It is not true
to say that therefore, I have not produced the minute book.
26. We are obtaining orders to purchase goods sent on Email
also. It is true to say that after receiving order we used to send quotation. It is
-- 1 of 5 --
16 C.C.No.1087/SS/2018
CW01 Exh.08
true to say that I have not produce the copy of email sent by the accused for
giving purchase order, but I can produce it. It is true to say that I have not
produced the quotation or confirmation of mail of order to the accused, but I
can produce it. It is not true to say that the accused company has not given
any purchase order to the complainant. It is not true to say that therefore, I
have not produced said document.
27. The complainant company hires the transport for supplying
the goods. We used transport facility of Mr. Vilas Kadam or Aditya Transport.
We used to generate two delivery challans for dispatch of goods. It is true to
say that after loading goods in a transport, we used to mentioned the details
of goods on delivery challans. One challan remains with the company and
other copy remains with the truck driver. In present case also there was two
delivery challans. The signature of receiver of goods is obtained on the
delivery challan. It is not true to say that I do not know the name of receiver
of the goods. The goods were received by Mr. Shuklaji. I do not know his
full name. It is true to say that after preparing the delivery challan the
company has to pay GST on the price of the goods. It is true to say that I have
not produced the GST return or receipt. I can produce the same. It is true to
say that the documents placed at Exh.21, Exh.22 and Exh.23 are prepared by
the complainant company. It is true to say that there is no signature of any of
the accused on above documents. It is not true to say that I have not given
any of the said documents to the accused. It is not true to say that the
accused company have not received the goods as per Exh.21 to 23.
28. Company is obtaining the goods price after its delivery by
sending invoice. I have not produced the proof of delivery of tax invoice in
respect of the goods sent to the accused. It is not true to say that I have not
produced the proof of delivery of tax invoice as the company has not
delivered any goods. The payment is to be demanded within 30 days after
delivery of the goods. It is not true to say that in present case complainant
has not demanded the price of goods in writing after 30 days. It is true to say
-- 2 of 5 --
17 C.C.No.1087/SS/2018
CW01 Exh.08
that there is no document as to demand of price of goods by the company to
the accused after 30 days.
29. The accused company gave two separate cheques in the
month of November 2017 to the complainant. One cheque was in respect of
interest on delayed payment which was honoured. The second cheque was
issued against the principle amount of price of goods. The same is
dishonoured. It is true to say that there is no writing as to making payment of
interest on principle sum in between complainant and accused. It is not true
to say that the cheque Exh.26 and the another cheque of interest was given to
the complainant towards the security of the transaction. It is not true to say
that the complainant company misused the blank cheques of the accused
issued towards security. It is not true to say that the contents of cheque
Exh.26 including writing, date and amount do not belongs to any of the
accused. It is true to say that I do not know who has written the contents of
cheque Exh.26.
30. It is true to say that I have not produced any document to
show that accused No.1 company is a private limited company. It is true to
say that I have not produced the form No.32 in respect of names of directors
of the company. It is true to say that I have not mentioned which of the
director is handling which post specifically in my evidence affidavit. It is true
to say that I have not mentioned which of the directors are vicariously liable
to pay cheque amount in my evidence affidavit. It is not true to say that I
personally or any employee of our company had not inquired as to the
directors of accused company in ROC. It is not true to say that accused No.1
company is Proprietorship Concerned and not Private Limited Company. It is
not true to say that therefore, accused are not liable to pay any amount to
the complainant.
31. The complainant company has maintained only bank
account in the Yes Bank, Kurla branch, Mumbai. I again that our bank
-- 3 of 5 --
18 C.C.No.1087/SS/2018
CW01 Exh.08
account is maintained in Yes Bank, main branch Bandra. It is true to say that
I have not produced the bank slip whereby I deposited the cheque in Kurla
Branch of Yes Bank Ltd. It is true to say that there is no seal of Yes Bank Ltd.
on the cheque return memo at Exh.27. It is true to say that the name of the
person who has signed the cheque return memo is not mentioned on Exh.27.
It is true to say that I have no personal knowledge as to who has signed the
cheque return memo. It is not true to say that the cheque Exh.26 was never
presented for encashment in the bank account and the same was never
dishonored.
32. The demand notice Exh.29 is prepared as per my
instructions. I had given instructions to Mr. Manish Kenia advocate High
Court for preparing notice. It is true to say that no name of advocate, address
of office or contact number is mentioned on the notice Exh.29, now shown to
me. It is true to say that the notice Exh.29 do not bears my signature as a
instructor of the contents. It is not true to say that I neither instructed Mr.
Manish Kenia to issue notice nor sent the notice to the accused persons. The
address mentioned on the notice is address of office of the accused. I do not
know that the office of accused was sealed by the Hon'ble High Court
Receiver. It is not true to say that therefore, none of the accused have
received the notice. It is true to say that there is no signature of accused No.2
and 3 on the registered post acknowledgments and speed post
acknowledgments filed at Exh.31.
33. It is not true to say that the delivery challan Exh.23 is not
original. It is true to say that the contents as to description of goods, name
and address of the accused etc. is a photocopy. It is true to say that the
delivery challan is not in my hand writing. It is true to say that I have not
produced the original copy of delivery challan. It is not true to say that I have
produced the false and forged delivery challan at Exh.23.
34. It is not true to say that the complainant company has not
-- 4 of 5 --
19 C.C.No.1087/SS/2018
CW01 Exh.08
sent any goods to the accused. It is not true to say that I am deposing false
that complainant has sent goods to the accused. It is not true to say that I
am deposing false that accused had given cheque Exh.26 for the payment of
price of goods. It is not true to say that I am deposing false that I am
authorised to file present complaint. It is not true to say that I am deposing
false that notices are sent as per my instructions to the accused. It is not true
to say that I have filed false complaint and deposing false against the
accused.
Cross examination is over.
No Reexamination.
R.O.A.C.
(M. P. Saraf)
Date : 02.08.2023 Metropolitan Magistrate,
58th Court, Bandra, Mumbai.
J.O.Code :MH01362
-- 5 of 5 --