Menu Close

News Update 18th June 2018

News Update 18th June 2018

  1. NBW against Mumbai builder in cheque bouncing case

A complaint was moved by Taro Vazirani before Metropolitan Magistrate, Ballard Pier, stating that Kakkad had approached Vazirani in March 2015, for a friendly loan for a period of two years, as he was in need of money for his business.

BRIEF FACTS

A complaint was moved by Taro Vazirani before Metropolitan Magistrate, Ballard Pier, stating that Kakkad had approached Vazirani in March 2015, for a friendly loan for a period of two years, as he was in need of money for his business.

Kakkad has constructed many residential and commercial projects in suburban Mumbai, the plea stated. On the request of Kakkad, Vazirani agreed to give a loan of Rs 20 lakh at the rate of 2.25% p.a. The complainant states that the accused had promised to repay the principal amount on March 31, 2017. The complaint states that Vazirani has duly received a compensation amount of Rs 81,000 after deducting TDS of Rs 9,000 from the accused of a period starting from April 1, 2015, to March 31, 2017.

Vazirani’s complaint further states that Kakkad handed over Vazirani a cheque of Rs 20 lakh, dated May 26, 2017. “However, to his (Vazirani) shock and surprise, the cheque returned dishonored, with the bank remarking that the said account was closed,” the complaint copy mentioned. On the basis of receipt from the bank, Vazirani had sent a statutory demand notice on June 28, 2017, for payment of the amount of the cheque, within 15 days, failing which Vazirani will approach the court to prosecute him under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

The warrant is received by the Vile Parle Police station, which was confirmed by the senior police inspector Laxman Chavan. The Magistrate court has posted the matter for Kakkad’s appearance on June 19. When contacted, Vazirani’s spokesperson, Vishal Manghnani of Wishman consultants, refused to comment.

HELD

A Magistrate court has issued a non-bailable warrant (NBW) against Niraj Kakkad, the proprietor of Niraj Construction, in an alleged Rs 20 lakh-cheque bouncing case. The complainant in his plea before the court has claimed that Kakkad had sought a ‘friendly loan’, which he had failed to repay.

 

  1. Gujarat state government extends the tenure of Naliya rape probe panel

The Gujarat government has set September 30 as the new deadline for the commission, led by retired Gujarat High Court judge Justice A L Dave, to submit its report.

BRIEF FACTS

A 34-year-old woman from Kothara village of Abdasa taluka in Kutch district was allegedly raped by several persons, including some office bearers of the ruling BJP.

The state government has granted an extension to the judicial inquiry commission probing the alleged Naliya gangrape case

The government has set September 30 as the new deadline for the commission, led by retired Gujarat High Court judge Justice A L Dave, to submit its report. This is the first extension granted to the probe panel after it was instituted by the government in March last year. The commission was asked to submit its report, “…as soon as possible, but not later than three months from the date of its first sitting”.

TRIAL PROCEEDINGS

A trial in the alleged gang rape case is currently going on in Kutch district court. Since its constitution under the provisions of the Commissions of Inquiry Act, the commission has not held a single public hearing till date. Two public advertisements seeking information on affidavit regarding the incident also did not evoke any response. So far, the commission has received only one representation. The Forum of Concerned Citizens on Naliya Incident, led by women activists like Zarna Pathak and Meenakshi Joshi of Ahmedabad, had moved an application to the commission for examining all the police officers involved in the investigation of the case.

BRIEF HEARING

A brief hearing on the forum’s application was held on June 11. The order of the commission on the application is pending. In January last year, a woman from Mumbai filed a complaint at Naliya police station in Abdasa taluka of Kutch district alleging that she was gang-raped for over a year, between August 2015 and November 2016.

Two days later, police registered an FIR and booked 10 persons for gangrape, molestation, kidnapping and wrongful confinement. They included then convener of BJP’s Abdasa taluka OBC cell Shantilal Solanki, BJP’s Gandhidham unit secretary Govind Parumalani, then BJP councilors of Gandhidham municipality Vasant Bhanushali and Ajit Ramwani among others.

  1. Enforcement Directorate to move court against Vijay Mallya in the first case under new fugitives law

According to the ordinance, a Fugitive Economic Offender is a person who has an arrest warrant issued in respect of a scheduled offense and who leaves or has left India so as to avoid criminal prosecution, or refuses to return to India to face criminal prosecution.

The Enforcement Directorate (ED) will move a special court this week for “immediate confiscation” of attached assets valued at over Rs 12,400 crore of Kingfisher Airlines owner Vijay Mallya under the recently promulgated Fugitive Economic Offenders Ordinance.

SPECIALIZED CASE

This is the first case under the new ordinance where the agency will approach the court to seek an official declaration to categorize Mallya as a “fugitive” based on its prosecution complaint — charge sheet — filed under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).

In the loan default case of the defunct airline, current worth of attached assets is higher than the amount, including interest, that Mallya is said to owe a consortium of 17 banks — around Rs 10,000 crore.

CONSEQUENCES OF MALLYA BEING DECLARED AS FUGITIVE

If the court declares Mallya a fugitive under the new ordinance, his assets in India and abroad will be liable for confiscation and can also be sold to satisfy creditors’ claims, even before the trial begins.

 

  1. Mumbai consumer forum dismisses the complaint against BEST

D’souza suggested changes that could be brought to the structure and also on seating arrangement of the BEST buses. He also sought Wifi services in buses.

BRIEF FACTS

A Mumbai resident approached a district consumer forum against the Brihanmumbai Electric Supply and Transport Undertaking (BEST) alleging overcharging and suggesting changes to the loss-making public transport. Vincent D’souza, a Dadar resident, filed a complaint before the South Mumbai District Consumer Redressal Forum this month, claiming that the BEST had indulged in unfair trade practices. D’souza claimed that on May 8, he had taken the BEST bus from Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj Terminus to Backbay in South Mumbai and was charged Rs 18. He added that on the same day when he had taken a bus, with the same number, from CSMT to Mantralaya, he was charged Rs 10.

D’souza also suggested changes that could be brought to the structure and also on seating arrangement of the BEST buses. He sought that they should be allowed to stop anywhere, even at spots without the designated bus stops, like cabs. He also sought Wifi services in buses. D’souza’s complaint was dismissed by the forum, which observed that it did not disclose any cause of action against BEST and was not a consumer dispute.

OBSERVATION OF THE FORUM

The forum observed that the complainant had made allegations of malpractice and negligence claiming unfair trade practices but had no ‘whisper of deficiency in service’.

DECISION OF THE FORUM

The forum analyzed the definition of an unfair trade practice and found that the definition did not fit the allegations made by the complainant.

“BEST is an autonomous body administered and controlled as per its own Acts/laws, rules and regulations enacted for it. Complainant has not produced any document on record to prove that BEST has breached their laws, rules, norms and overcharged him as alleged in the complaint,” the forum said. It further said the complainant in his plea had merely made suggestions to BEST without showing how its services were of malpractice or negligence.

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *