Search the Internet          Tips  Sites: Finance, Investment

Tatas rejoinder challenges EOW finding in Pendse charges

BS Markets Bureau in Mumbai

Tata Finance Ltd filed a 33-page rejoinder challenging the report of the Economic Offences Wing of the Mumbai police in the 19th Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Mumbai.

The rejoinder challenged the EOW's petition before the court to close the case under summary 'C'. The court has set the next date of hearing for November 15, 2002.

TFL submitted to the court that the conclusion of the investigating officer is incorrect and contrary to the evidence gathered by him. TFL in the rejoinder said that the IO had not correctly interpreted the law relating to the various offences disclosed in the course of the investigation.

"It is therefore submitted that the case calls for further investigation, re-investigation into various aspects of the case and appreciation of the facts of the case, which clearly show that various offences and irregularities have been committed," the rejoinder says.

It says that Dilip Pendse, former managing director of Tata Finance, resorted to manipulation in the nature of fraudulent circular transactions in order to misrepresent the true financial condition to the company and its shareholders.

Further, Pendse also resorted to several other fraudulent acts in order to conceal the real financial state of Tata Finance, it said. The document lists a host of charges filed against Pendse and associates, including charges of criminal breach of trust, falsification of accounts and forgery.

"The investigating officer had interrogated Freddie Mehta, Kishore Chaukar and Talaulicar, who denied having any knowledge or given any consent to aforesaid transactions done at end of every quarter. Still, the investigating officer has brushed aside their statements and believed Pendse in this connection," the rejoinder pointed out in connection with the various circular transactions allegedly done by Pendse to circumvent RBI capital adequacy guidelines.

Besides, it was the duty of the investigating officer to examine all the directors on the board in view of Pendse's defence, the rejoinder says.

"It appears from this as well as other parts of the investigation that the police were not interested in full and proper investigation of the case but to wind it up by stating that they believed Pendse and they disbelieved others," the rejoinder says. It further said that the investigation was haphazard and incomplete and not sufficient to close the case.

The rejoinder also highlighted the fact that there was enough evidence, which was available against Pendse but was not considered while drawing the conclusions and petitioning the court to close the case. EOW had started its investigations into charges of criminal breach of trust and forgery after TFL filed a FIR (CR No. 76/2001) with it on August 6, 2001. Two additional complaints were filed later on October 31, 2001 and June 28, 2002 with EOW.

Powered by

ALSO READ:
The Tata Finance Fiasco
More Money Headlines