LETTER ADDRESSED TO CJ ON 24-11-2003
BY SPEED POST AD
PANKAJ S. MODY
2ND FLOOR JANMANGAL APT
40 BRAHMAN MITRA MANDAL SOC.
AHMEDABAD 380 006
EMAIL: modypan4@yahoo.co.in
Dated: 24-11-2003
THE HONOURABLE CHIEF JUSTICE SHRI BHAVANISINGH
GUJARAT HIGH COURT
SOLA-GANDHINAGAR HIGHWAY
AHMEDABAD
RESPECTED SIR,
SUBJECT: REVIEW APPLICATION
IN APPEAL FROM ORDER 176/2003 IN
CIVIL SUIT 5827/2001.
====================================
1. Briefly stated, the facts are as under:-
(a) I had written a very valuable and informative letter to Global Trust Bank to conduct vigilance inquiries on funds borrowed from the Bank to the tune of Rs. 12.5.crores by the directors ,etc. of Core Health Care Ltd and to pressurize me to withdraw that application to cover up their acts of collusion and illegalities, I was put on police remand in December 1999 by Mr. Jatin Jalundhwala, employee of the company to torture,scare and humiliate me. This was done to silence me and as I had refused to be purchased by them to keep quite.
(b) I had issued notice to that group on 12-1-2000 (Annex A-14) as that group had given around Rs 39.00 crores NON INTEREST BEARING FUNDS to its subsidiary TECHNOLOGY FINANCE LTD while they managed to mobilize RS 12.5 crores INTEREST BEARING loan from GLOBAL TRUST BANK with the help of Mr. Jatin Jalundhwala by conniving with bank officers. They did not have any explanation to offer in this regard and subtle threat was issued through their advocate Shri. A.D.Shah to silence the undersigned . BIFR also made adverse comments on this issue, vide annexure A-2. A Xerox copy of which is submitted herewith.
(c) The INDIAN EXPRESS newspaper dated 7-12-2002 brought out front page article about this group titled as GREAT BANK ROBBERY (sum involved RS. 751 crores of banks and financial institutions) vis-a-vis their lame defense on diversion of large NON INTEREST BEARING funds to Technology Finance Ltd. (Annexure A-3).
2. (A) I had filed Civil Suit 5827/2001 in the city of Ahmedabad obtaining injunction and asking the party and the bank to furnish documentary evidence of ownership of suit property and company, namely Rupmanglam Investment Private Ltd owned by by me.
(B) One of the defendants, Dhanyuhsya Financial Ltd filed CRA 25 and CRA 26/2002 and advocate Mr. Saurabh Soparkar appeared as counsel in the matter on behalf of the defendant and the Honourable Judge Shri D.K. Trivedi had given directions that the defendants SHALL FURNISH all particulars latest by April 26,2002 and the City Civil Court shall finalize the stay application by June 30, 2002. (Reference Annex A-4).
(C) The defendants DID NOT care to HONOUR to file the relevant details as per HIGH COURT’s directions on time by producing minute book, statutory records of the company,balance sheets, of the so called holding company as well as so called subsidiary company along with records filed with Registrar of Companies, etc. as directed by the Honourable Court. This, your Honour will agree is patent contempt of Court and deliberate disregard of High Court’s directives. Your Honour will agree, when I allege that when the party to the litigation ignores to comply with Courts’ orders, the legal and natural presumption is that if the documents are produced, the matter may go against them. Having regard to the totality and the circumstances of the case, I hope , the High Court will waste no further time to launch contempt of court proceedings both against the party as well as their advocate(s) who are supposed to have advised his clients to conveniently ignore High Court directives.
(D) Sir,around April 30,2002 and December 10,2002 most surprisingly and under suspicious circumstances, FIRE broke out in the Insurance Building occupied by Income Tax department on Ashram Road, A’bad where the Income Tax records of several companies including these two companies were filed and all the files were reportedly destroyed in fire as per the press reports. The dates of incidents suggest detailed probing as it involves fire incident in the most important government office and the information was brought to the knowledge of various authorities. It appears that each and every authority concerned have adopted deaf and dumb attitude for the reasons best known to them. Such callous attitude encourages happenings of such fire incidents and of serious concern to security aspects.
(E) I had contested the order passed by the City Civil Court on 8-4-2002 by filing the Appeal from Order 176/2003 and Civil Application 3110/03. (annexure A-5,A-6).The Honourable Judge Shri C.K. Buch on May 8th 2003 suggested that the matter be kept after vacation as the matter required careful and substantial hearing as
the undersigned was appearing as PARTY-IN-PERSON only, as I could not afford high fees of High Court Advocate.
(F) An appeal from the Order 176/2003 was heard by Honourable Judge Miss R.M.Doshit on 24-6-2003 and the matter was dismissed summarily.The order passed in AFO 176 (annex A-7,A-8) just stated “NO GROUND FOR INTEREFERENCE IS MADE OUT.HENCE DISMISSED.” One feels that unfortunately, the decision has been arrived at by the Learned Lordship without going through the bulky facts of the case as well as without appreciating both the facts as well as the grounds in Appeal From Order (nineteen grounds) and without calling for written submissions from the defendants and without narrating /discussing various facets,viewpoints and arguments in the judgement order, probably –
(i) for want of adequate time available to the Judiciary to grasp and assimilate the complexities of the matter.
(ii) The learned judge did not appreciate adverse comments from a stranger appearing as Party-In-Person against the advocates defending the case of their clients on account of preset unconscious image of familiarity of the advocates representing the defendants prevalent in the mind and inability to erase the same from mental plane.
(iii) The learned was unaware of her own latent potential capacity of curiosity, capacity to doubt and to inquire and to obtain written reply from the defendants.
(iv) The learned judge lacked real inner yearning and enthusiasm to find truth about defendants concealments and thereby deny real justice to the applicant.
(G) Sir, I most respectfully submit that there is no intention of my part to undermine the Dignity and Honour of the Judicial Officers, at all. I, therefore, humbly pray that , I need not be misunderstood. Sir, I am poor but TRUTHFUL litigant fighting for justice all alone as I cannot afford exorbitant fees of advocates practicing in the High Court.
3. Sir, I have filed this review application MCAST ..../2003 in this Appeal From Order 176/2003 as Party-in –Person (Annex A-9 ) and I feel that the original judge who has decided the matter, may not consider the review application with unbiased mind and quite naturally. I , therefore, most humbly pray your Honour to consider the review
application before a LARGER BENCH for the reasons stated below:-
(i) This matter involves PRESTIGE,DIGNITY AND HONOUR of Gujarat High Court especially when the directions of the High Court in CRA 25 and 26/2002 are not complied with. It would give wrong signal to the practicing advocates that there is no need to take seriously the High Court directions and that it is easy to go scot free and also to continue deceiving the learned judges.
(ii) When the charge created is of Rs 12.5 crores on a huge residential immoveable Property near Parimal Rly Crossing, Doctor House admeasuring 3000 sq meters works out as Rs.40,000/sqmeter only which appears absurd . And banker would never be able to recover such rate from the market and ultimately jeopardizing the interest of depositors in the bank and this aspect needs to be considered by the Judiciary and the Judiciary needs to probe the bankers in depth.
(iii) The defendants group have defaulted around Rs 751 crores to financial institutions and as the defendants have not been able to establish ownership of the property/company in the suit property which has been transferred by ignoring provisions of S.123 of Transfer of Property act(without regular conveyance deed and without paying for adequate court fees) and violating provisions of Chapter XX- C of the Income Tax (violating mandatory requirement of obtaining 37 I permission from income tax authorities). The Honourable Judges need to closely examine this fishy matter and may possibly retrieve funds by piercing corporate veil.
(iv) It would not be possible for the defendants to engage advocates the group has already defaulted to tune of Rs 750 crores and the fact that they are able to engage senior advocates means that they have siphoned large amounts and have the financial capacity to engage senior advocates. It is for this reason they need to be called in person so that they do not dodge the real issues and their falsehoods are exposed immediately.
(v) On one hand the Core group has filed reply with the city civil court accepting of Mr. Soparkar’s role as an escrow person which contradicts with the reply given by Mr. Soparkar (to the Bar council after the judgement order was pronounced on 24-6-2003) denying his role as an escrow person which shows that the defendants as well as Mr. Soparkar are shielding each other so that they can successfully dodge the issue of suppressing material facts being simultaneously exposed before the learned judges. Sly and manipulative skills are used by Mr. Soparkar to misguide and to keep the courts in dark and this fundamental contradiction GOT REVEALED ONLY after the decision of AFO judgement order when Mr. Soparkar filed reply to the Bar Council. The Bar Council deliberately did not initiate inquiry against Mr. Soparkar even when the complaint was filed against Mr. Soparkar on 12-9-2002 (annex A-12). Bar council deliberately chose to initiate inquiry only after the judgement order was finalized on 24-6-2003.Mr. Soparkar denied his role as an escrow person only on 21-8-2003(annex-A-13). Therefore, the matter needs to be examined afresh as the previous exercise of assumptions considered by the courts have fallen to pieces on account of deliberate deceptions of Mr. Soparkar and his clients. I humbly request your lordship that the entire matter is reexamined. In this connection, I am enclosing affidavit in reply by the undersigned to the Bar Council on 22-9-2003 (Annex A-14) and needs your personal attention. It appears that both Bar Council and Mr. Soparkar are hand in glove as the matter has not been brought to your attention deliberately so as to protect Mr. Soparkar from his personal involvement in banking fraud.When lion in Mr. Soparkar in the courts acquires timidity of lamb by not fighting to protect his own strength of character , then it means that he is involved in banking fraud.
(vi) The order passed by the learned judge of the Gujarat High Court on 24-6-2003 appears to be perverse.
(vii) The Director General of Income Tax-Investigation Wing has thanked undersigned vide their letter dated 19-9-2000 confirming tax evasion based on enquiry conducted by them and the Honorable High Court would not like to ignore the revenue angle. A Xerox copy of the same is submitted herewith (Annexure A9). Your Honour would be shocked to learn that the income tax authorities are deliberately avoiding action against the group and that the income tax authorities and this group along with their tax advocate Mr. Soparkar and the auditors Mr. Hemant Kashiparekh are hand in glove with one another so as to shield and protect them and inspite of several letters addressed to the income tax authorities they have deliberately not initiated any action against this group.The attitude of the senior officers have been reported to the Central Vigilance Commission as well as the current top officers of the local income tax department.
(viii) Core health Care had filed criminal defamation case 3326/99 in Metropolitan Court-15 against the undersigned in October 1999 and the complainant is deliberately evading to remain present in the court seeking adjournments while the undersigned has to remain present in the courts since 1999 onwards till date . Such frivolous practices to be curbed by taking stern action against the defendants as well as their advocates as it unnecessarily increases the workload of the judiciary and cause harassment as well as bear high cost of engaging advocates for defense.
4. Sir, our Honourable President of India in his address to the Judiciary in April 2003 has observed need for simplicity as even the learned people find the procedure complex, requiring assistance of advocates for high legal fees to represent and convey the arguments on behalf of the clients in the courts even for simple issues.
5. As the defendants as well as Mr. Soparkar have deceived the courts as referred in para 3(v), it is necessary to serve notices to the defendants and Mr. Soparkar and they are called upon to furnish detailed written affidavit on oath so that the courts do not have to rely on oral ,contradictory, concealing statements before they are minutely examined subsequently.This is the only manner by which Mr. Soparkar can be restrained further from ripping and raping the financial institutions/economy which can tear apart the social fabric of the families as the common man faces double edged sword- bank deposit rate drifting downward while the inflation rate going up. After the companies are financially stripped the companies are wound up so that all the illegalities can be buried safely. Personal financial health of promoters of CORE HEALTH CARE continue to be strong even after the parent public limited company is stripped with help of persons like Mr. Soparkar and the company auditors. I hope that the acts of whistleblower like us need to be appreciated and respected when we come foreward directly to tell the courts especially when no advocate would like to expose the illegal acts of the fellow advocates practicing in the high courts. Persons like us face grave personal risk from such white collared advocate like Mr. Soparkar and his colleagues, when we take initiative to expose their illegal actions. I have briefly narrated the same in my letter to the Bar Council. I hope that the matter is taken very seriously to probe the conduct of Mr. Soparkar.
6. Sir, I most humbly request your lordship to kindly allow this MCAST..... petition be placed before LARGER BENCH in the interest of justice, equity and good conscience . I also would like to make humble request that complete records are called from the Chamber court and necessary instructions are to staff to inform me in advance as I am appearing as Party-In-Person.
7. In view of harassment by holding the undersigned on police remand, and my acts of being a whistleblower, I hope that I am given some sort of protection so that I am not restrained to appear before the courts by any external unknown agencies from time to time.
Yours truly,
Pankaj S. Mody
Ahmedabad ,Date 24-11-2003
Encl: Annexures as per the original table
PANKAJ S. MODY
2ND FLOOR JANMANGAL APT
40 BRAHMAN MITRA MANDAL SOC.
AHMEDABAD 380 006
EMAIL: modypan4@yahoo.co.in
Dated: 24-11-2003
THE HONOURABLE CHIEF JUSTICE SHRI BHAVANISINGH
GUJARAT HIGH COURT
SOLA-GANDHINAGAR HIGHWAY
AHMEDABAD
RESPECTED SIR,
SUBJECT: REVIEW APPLICATION
IN APPEAL FROM ORDER 176/2003 IN
CIVIL SUIT 5827/2001.
====================================
1. Briefly stated, the facts are as under:-
(a) I had written a very valuable and informative letter to Global Trust Bank to conduct vigilance inquiries on funds borrowed from the Bank to the tune of Rs. 12.5.crores by the directors ,etc. of Core Health Care Ltd and to pressurize me to withdraw that application to cover up their acts of collusion and illegalities, I was put on police remand in December 1999 by Mr. Jatin Jalundhwala, employee of the company to torture,scare and humiliate me. This was done to silence me and as I had refused to be purchased by them to keep quite.
(b) I had issued notice to that group on 12-1-2000 (Annex A-14) as that group had given around Rs 39.00 crores NON INTEREST BEARING FUNDS to its subsidiary TECHNOLOGY FINANCE LTD while they managed to mobilize RS 12.5 crores INTEREST BEARING loan from GLOBAL TRUST BANK with the help of Mr. Jatin Jalundhwala by conniving with bank officers. They did not have any explanation to offer in this regard and subtle threat was issued through their advocate Shri. A.D.Shah to silence the undersigned . BIFR also made adverse comments on this issue, vide annexure A-2. A Xerox copy of which is submitted herewith.
(c) The INDIAN EXPRESS newspaper dated 7-12-2002 brought out front page article about this group titled as GREAT BANK ROBBERY (sum involved RS. 751 crores of banks and financial institutions) vis-a-vis their lame defense on diversion of large NON INTEREST BEARING funds to Technology Finance Ltd. (Annexure A-3).
2. (A) I had filed Civil Suit 5827/2001 in the city of Ahmedabad obtaining injunction and asking the party and the bank to furnish documentary evidence of ownership of suit property and company, namely Rupmanglam Investment Private Ltd owned by by me.
(B) One of the defendants, Dhanyuhsya Financial Ltd filed CRA 25 and CRA 26/2002 and advocate Mr. Saurabh Soparkar appeared as counsel in the matter on behalf of the defendant and the Honourable Judge Shri D.K. Trivedi had given directions that the defendants SHALL FURNISH all particulars latest by April 26,2002 and the City Civil Court shall finalize the stay application by June 30, 2002. (Reference Annex A-4).
(C) The defendants DID NOT care to HONOUR to file the relevant details as per HIGH COURT’s directions on time by producing minute book, statutory records of the company,balance sheets, of the so called holding company as well as so called subsidiary company along with records filed with Registrar of Companies, etc. as directed by the Honourable Court. This, your Honour will agree is patent contempt of Court and deliberate disregard of High Court’s directives. Your Honour will agree, when I allege that when the party to the litigation ignores to comply with Courts’ orders, the legal and natural presumption is that if the documents are produced, the matter may go against them. Having regard to the totality and the circumstances of the case, I hope , the High Court will waste no further time to launch contempt of court proceedings both against the party as well as their advocate(s) who are supposed to have advised his clients to conveniently ignore High Court directives.
(D) Sir,around April 30,2002 and December 10,2002 most surprisingly and under suspicious circumstances, FIRE broke out in the Insurance Building occupied by Income Tax department on Ashram Road, A’bad where the Income Tax records of several companies including these two companies were filed and all the files were reportedly destroyed in fire as per the press reports. The dates of incidents suggest detailed probing as it involves fire incident in the most important government office and the information was brought to the knowledge of various authorities. It appears that each and every authority concerned have adopted deaf and dumb attitude for the reasons best known to them. Such callous attitude encourages happenings of such fire incidents and of serious concern to security aspects.
(E) I had contested the order passed by the City Civil Court on 8-4-2002 by filing the Appeal from Order 176/2003 and Civil Application 3110/03. (annexure A-5,A-6).The Honourable Judge Shri C.K. Buch on May 8th 2003 suggested that the matter be kept after vacation as the matter required careful and substantial hearing as
the undersigned was appearing as PARTY-IN-PERSON only, as I could not afford high fees of High Court Advocate.
(F) An appeal from the Order 176/2003 was heard by Honourable Judge Miss R.M.Doshit on 24-6-2003 and the matter was dismissed summarily.The order passed in AFO 176 (annex A-7,A-8) just stated “NO GROUND FOR INTEREFERENCE IS MADE OUT.HENCE DISMISSED.” One feels that unfortunately, the decision has been arrived at by the Learned Lordship without going through the bulky facts of the case as well as without appreciating both the facts as well as the grounds in Appeal From Order (nineteen grounds) and without calling for written submissions from the defendants and without narrating /discussing various facets,viewpoints and arguments in the judgement order, probably –
(i) for want of adequate time available to the Judiciary to grasp and assimilate the complexities of the matter.
(ii) The learned judge did not appreciate adverse comments from a stranger appearing as Party-In-Person against the advocates defending the case of their clients on account of preset unconscious image of familiarity of the advocates representing the defendants prevalent in the mind and inability to erase the same from mental plane.
(iii) The learned was unaware of her own latent potential capacity of curiosity, capacity to doubt and to inquire and to obtain written reply from the defendants.
(iv) The learned judge lacked real inner yearning and enthusiasm to find truth about defendants concealments and thereby deny real justice to the applicant.
(G) Sir, I most respectfully submit that there is no intention of my part to undermine the Dignity and Honour of the Judicial Officers, at all. I, therefore, humbly pray that , I need not be misunderstood. Sir, I am poor but TRUTHFUL litigant fighting for justice all alone as I cannot afford exorbitant fees of advocates practicing in the High Court.
3. Sir, I have filed this review application MCAST ..../2003 in this Appeal From Order 176/2003 as Party-in –Person (Annex A-9 ) and I feel that the original judge who has decided the matter, may not consider the review application with unbiased mind and quite naturally. I , therefore, most humbly pray your Honour to consider the review
application before a LARGER BENCH for the reasons stated below:-
(i) This matter involves PRESTIGE,DIGNITY AND HONOUR of Gujarat High Court especially when the directions of the High Court in CRA 25 and 26/2002 are not complied with. It would give wrong signal to the practicing advocates that there is no need to take seriously the High Court directions and that it is easy to go scot free and also to continue deceiving the learned judges.
(ii) When the charge created is of Rs 12.5 crores on a huge residential immoveable Property near Parimal Rly Crossing, Doctor House admeasuring 3000 sq meters works out as Rs.40,000/sqmeter only which appears absurd . And banker would never be able to recover such rate from the market and ultimately jeopardizing the interest of depositors in the bank and this aspect needs to be considered by the Judiciary and the Judiciary needs to probe the bankers in depth.
(iii) The defendants group have defaulted around Rs 751 crores to financial institutions and as the defendants have not been able to establish ownership of the property/company in the suit property which has been transferred by ignoring provisions of S.123 of Transfer of Property act(without regular conveyance deed and without paying for adequate court fees) and violating provisions of Chapter XX- C of the Income Tax (violating mandatory requirement of obtaining 37 I permission from income tax authorities). The Honourable Judges need to closely examine this fishy matter and may possibly retrieve funds by piercing corporate veil.
(iv) It would not be possible for the defendants to engage advocates the group has already defaulted to tune of Rs 750 crores and the fact that they are able to engage senior advocates means that they have siphoned large amounts and have the financial capacity to engage senior advocates. It is for this reason they need to be called in person so that they do not dodge the real issues and their falsehoods are exposed immediately.
(v) On one hand the Core group has filed reply with the city civil court accepting of Mr. Soparkar’s role as an escrow person which contradicts with the reply given by Mr. Soparkar (to the Bar council after the judgement order was pronounced on 24-6-2003) denying his role as an escrow person which shows that the defendants as well as Mr. Soparkar are shielding each other so that they can successfully dodge the issue of suppressing material facts being simultaneously exposed before the learned judges. Sly and manipulative skills are used by Mr. Soparkar to misguide and to keep the courts in dark and this fundamental contradiction GOT REVEALED ONLY after the decision of AFO judgement order when Mr. Soparkar filed reply to the Bar Council. The Bar Council deliberately did not initiate inquiry against Mr. Soparkar even when the complaint was filed against Mr. Soparkar on 12-9-2002 (annex A-12). Bar council deliberately chose to initiate inquiry only after the judgement order was finalized on 24-6-2003.Mr. Soparkar denied his role as an escrow person only on 21-8-2003(annex-A-13). Therefore, the matter needs to be examined afresh as the previous exercise of assumptions considered by the courts have fallen to pieces on account of deliberate deceptions of Mr. Soparkar and his clients. I humbly request your lordship that the entire matter is reexamined. In this connection, I am enclosing affidavit in reply by the undersigned to the Bar Council on 22-9-2003 (Annex A-14) and needs your personal attention. It appears that both Bar Council and Mr. Soparkar are hand in glove as the matter has not been brought to your attention deliberately so as to protect Mr. Soparkar from his personal involvement in banking fraud.When lion in Mr. Soparkar in the courts acquires timidity of lamb by not fighting to protect his own strength of character , then it means that he is involved in banking fraud.
(vi) The order passed by the learned judge of the Gujarat High Court on 24-6-2003 appears to be perverse.
(vii) The Director General of Income Tax-Investigation Wing has thanked undersigned vide their letter dated 19-9-2000 confirming tax evasion based on enquiry conducted by them and the Honorable High Court would not like to ignore the revenue angle. A Xerox copy of the same is submitted herewith (Annexure A9). Your Honour would be shocked to learn that the income tax authorities are deliberately avoiding action against the group and that the income tax authorities and this group along with their tax advocate Mr. Soparkar and the auditors Mr. Hemant Kashiparekh are hand in glove with one another so as to shield and protect them and inspite of several letters addressed to the income tax authorities they have deliberately not initiated any action against this group.The attitude of the senior officers have been reported to the Central Vigilance Commission as well as the current top officers of the local income tax department.
(viii) Core health Care had filed criminal defamation case 3326/99 in Metropolitan Court-15 against the undersigned in October 1999 and the complainant is deliberately evading to remain present in the court seeking adjournments while the undersigned has to remain present in the courts since 1999 onwards till date . Such frivolous practices to be curbed by taking stern action against the defendants as well as their advocates as it unnecessarily increases the workload of the judiciary and cause harassment as well as bear high cost of engaging advocates for defense.
4. Sir, our Honourable President of India in his address to the Judiciary in April 2003 has observed need for simplicity as even the learned people find the procedure complex, requiring assistance of advocates for high legal fees to represent and convey the arguments on behalf of the clients in the courts even for simple issues.
5. As the defendants as well as Mr. Soparkar have deceived the courts as referred in para 3(v), it is necessary to serve notices to the defendants and Mr. Soparkar and they are called upon to furnish detailed written affidavit on oath so that the courts do not have to rely on oral ,contradictory, concealing statements before they are minutely examined subsequently.This is the only manner by which Mr. Soparkar can be restrained further from ripping and raping the financial institutions/economy which can tear apart the social fabric of the families as the common man faces double edged sword- bank deposit rate drifting downward while the inflation rate going up. After the companies are financially stripped the companies are wound up so that all the illegalities can be buried safely. Personal financial health of promoters of CORE HEALTH CARE continue to be strong even after the parent public limited company is stripped with help of persons like Mr. Soparkar and the company auditors. I hope that the acts of whistleblower like us need to be appreciated and respected when we come foreward directly to tell the courts especially when no advocate would like to expose the illegal acts of the fellow advocates practicing in the high courts. Persons like us face grave personal risk from such white collared advocate like Mr. Soparkar and his colleagues, when we take initiative to expose their illegal actions. I have briefly narrated the same in my letter to the Bar Council. I hope that the matter is taken very seriously to probe the conduct of Mr. Soparkar.
6. Sir, I most humbly request your lordship to kindly allow this MCAST..... petition be placed before LARGER BENCH in the interest of justice, equity and good conscience . I also would like to make humble request that complete records are called from the Chamber court and necessary instructions are to staff to inform me in advance as I am appearing as Party-In-Person.
7. In view of harassment by holding the undersigned on police remand, and my acts of being a whistleblower, I hope that I am given some sort of protection so that I am not restrained to appear before the courts by any external unknown agencies from time to time.
Yours truly,
Pankaj S. Mody
Ahmedabad ,Date 24-11-2003
Encl: Annexures as per the original table
posted by mody @ 4:57 AM
