Interim Order 1

Order Details: Copy of Document.
Pdf Text: 9 C.C.No.1135/SS/2019
CW-1 Exh.13
22. 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 : 07.05.2024 Metropolitan Magistrate,
58th Court, Bandra, Mumbai.
Cross examination of CW-01- Pankaj Mahendra Jain by advocate Mr. M.
K. Giri for the accused :
23. M/s. A.V. Enterprises is HUF Firm since year 2011. The
firm is run by myself, my son Vimal Seth, my niece Kunal Shah. Myself
is the only responsible person for the day to day affairs of M/s.
A.V.Enterprises. My son and niece are not getting any profit from the
firm. I am the proprietor of the firm. I do not know the different
between HUF firm and Proprietorship Firm as such I can not tell which
of my statement as to the nature of firm is true and correct. I do not
know reading English. I can read English a little bit.
24. I know the accsued No.1 through broker Pravin Shah. It is
true to say that I have not stated in my complaint that I know accused
through broker Pravin Shah. I can not tell since when I am knowing
accused No.1 and 2. Nature of our business is to trade and supply steel
price. I do not remember the date of first supply of steel made to the
accused. The last transaction of supply of pipe to the accused was in
mid of year 2018-2019. It is true to say that we used to keep ledger
account of every customer to whom we supplied steel. It is not true to
say that I have not produced the ledger account of accused. I have
produced it at Exh.30. I might have sent the extract of ledger account
to the accused on whatsapp. I do not possess the whats app messages.
-- 1 of 3 --
10 C.C.No.1135/SS/2019
CW-1 Exh.13
25. It is true to say that the Dispatch Document Number,
Delivery Note Date, Destination Columns in Invoice Exh.24 now shown
to me are blank. The goods use to be supplied from our godown
through the vehicle of the party purchasing same. We do not know
where the goods were taken by the parties. It is true to say that there is
no signature on Tax Invoice for the receiver of the goods. It is true to
say that none of the invoices bears signature of receiving the goods by
the receiver. It is true to say that all the Tax Invoices contains blank
columns of Suppliers Reference, Order No., Dispatch Document,
Delivery Note Date and Destination. I can produce the GST returns
submitted by me to show that I have paid the requisite amount of GST
on the goods supplied as per invoices Exh.24 to 26. The invoices used
to be prepared by my staff members. It is not true to say that the
invoices are wrong and the goods are not supplied to the accused.
26. I can not tell the name of signatory of the Delivery Note. It
is not true to say that the goods mentioned in delivery note dated
22.10.2018 now shown to me are not delivered to the accused. The
Delivery Note Photo copy is marked at Exh.45 as referred in cross
exmamination to the witness. We accepts the purchase order even on
phone. It is true to say that I do not know when the purchase order was
given to me but I know who had given the purchas order. It is not true
to say that accsued No.1 and 2 had not given any purchse order of steel
to me.
27. Now I am shown subject cheques. I do not know in whose
handwrting the subject cheques are. It is not true to say that I do not
know who has signed cheques Exh.31 to 33. The cheques are signed by
the accused in my presence. It is not true to say that accused have
-- 2 of 3 --
11 C.C.No.1135/SS/2019
CW-1 Exh.13
never issued said cheques to me.
28. It is true to say that in my notice Exh.37 I have not
mentioned about Purchase Orders, Delivery Challans and Supply of
Goods to the accused. It is true to say that there is difference is
signature on the cheques and Postal A.D. Cards. I can not tell whether
the notice sent to the accused is received or not received by me. It is
not true to say that I have not supplied any steel item to the accused. I
am submitting returns for the A.V.Enterprises. We used to show balance
amount of customers in our balancesheet. It is not true to say that I
have not shown the balance amount towards accused in Balancesheet
and Income Tax Returns. It is not true to say that accsued is not liable
to make payment to me. It is not true to say that the cheques were
issued towards security of another transactions by the accused. It is not
true to say that I have misused the cheques. It is not true to say that I
have not supplied any material to the accused. 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 : 07.05.2024 Metropolitan Magistrate,
58th Court, Bandra, Mumbai.
J.O.Code :MH01362
-- 3 of 3 --