Interim Order 2

Order Details: Copy of Document.
Pdf Text: 7 C.C.No.1276/SS/2019
CW-1 Exh.12
11. 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 : 05.01.2024 Metropolitan Magistrate,
58th Court, Bandra, Mumbai.
Cross examination of CW-01- Gogia Pradeep Narayandas by advocate
Mr. Anand R. Kannoi for the accused :
12. The firm Gogia Pradeep Narayandas HUF is formed prior
to 20 years. I can not tell what was the capital of the firm on the date
of its formation. My wife Anuradha Gogia, son Nichaya Gogia, daughter
Kriti Gogia were the coparceners of HUF firm. Witness volunteers that
the same is nowhere on record. There are no signatures or their names
of other coparceners at any place or on any record. Bank has not asked
me any agreement of HUF. It is true to say that I do not possess any
document for formation of HUF or any agreement or any MOU with
me. I am submitting income tax returns for the HUF, since its
formation. It is not true to say that major activity of the firm is to give
loan. I have filed number of cases in the court on behalf of the firm. It
is true to say that all cases are pertaining to dishnour of cheques. It is
true to say that all the said cases are in respect of the cheque
dishonoured for repayment of loan given by me to several persons. I am
not possessing Money Lending Licence. I have not done any money
lending. It is true to say that I am not disbursing any loan without any
benefit free of charge. It is true to say that I am charging interest for
loan. Sometimes I accepts the profit from the business on profit sharing
basis. The rate of interest depends upon the profit earning capacity of
the person to person. I have charged interest @ 1.5 % per month in
present case. I have shown the income arrived from interest in my
-- 1 of 3 --
8 C.C.No.1276/SS/2019
CW-1 Exh.12
income tax return. I am not ready to produce income tax returns with
Profit and loss accounts. It is not true to say that I am reluctant to
produce the income tax returns and Balance sheet including profit and
loss statements as I have not shown the loan amount and interest
derived from the same in my books of account.
13. It is true to say that I came in contact with the accused
through Finance Broker Suresh Satwani. I came into contact of accused
first time in the month of September 2018. I am knowing Suresh
Satwani from year 2015. I might have given loan to 2 or 3 persons
through Suresh Satwani. I have not executed loan agreement with the
accused while giving loan. I gave loan to the accused on the guarantee
of his wife Naina Kejriwal. I can produce my bank pass book in which
the transaction is reflected. It is true to say that the repayment made by
the accused is also reflected in my bank account and pass book. It is
true that I have not given details of repayment made by the accused in
my affidavit. I can produce the details and passbook. It is not true to
say that I used to obtain security cheques against the loan. It is true to
say that I used to give loan without accepting cheques on the basis of
Bill of Exchange. It is true to say that the Finance Broker Suresh
Satwani has not signed any of the document. I am not paying any
amount towards brokerage to the broker.
Cross examination is deferred till next date on oral request
of the advocate for the accused.
R.O.A.C.
(M. P. Saraf)
Date : 05.01.2024 Metropolitan Magistrate,
58th Court, Bandra, Mumbai.
J.O.Code :MH01362
-- 2 of 3 --
9 C.C.No.1276/SS/2019
CW-1 Exh.12
Date : 28.07.2025
Resumed on S.A.
Further cross examination of CW-01- Gogia Pradeep Narayandas by
advocate Mr. Anand R. Kannoi for the accused :
14. I have not brought the Bank account statements as agreed
on last date. My bank account is freezed. I will try to produce it on next
date. It is not true to say that broker Satwani used to collect the
amounts from the accused. Accused gave me post dated cheques. I
received six Post Dated Cheques from the accused for first transaction. I
encashed only four cheques out of those six cheques. It is true to say
that I have not produced those two cheques but I do not need to
produce it. I can tell which two cheques were not encashed. Cheque
dated 25.02.2019 and 25.03.2019 were not encashed.
15. I have not received Rs.50,000/- on 13.12.2018 by cheque
687016 from the accused.
Cross examination is deferred till next date for production
of bank statement by the complainant.
R.O.A.C.
(M. P. Saraf)
Date : 28.07.2025 Judicial Magistrate(First Class),
58th Court, Bandra, Mumbai.
J.O.Code :MH01362
-- 3 of 3 --