Validity sale of goods & article on estimates
Chetan Padm
(Querist) 26 September 2011
This query is : Resolved
Hello
Mr. Amit get a quotation/ estimate for a TV worth 70000/- from shopkeeper to be given in marraige.
Mr. Amit never buys it. Marriage is disputed. Mr. Amit uses the the quotation / estimate to prove that TV worth 70000/- was given in marriage to put case under 406IPC, and should be returned.
Magistrate takes cognizance against Mr. Rahul u/s 406IPC.
Mr. Rahul goes to sales tax department and lodge a complaint against shopkeeper that he is involved in black marketing and selling goods on estimates/ quotations and escaping VAT and sales tax.
Shopkeeper files affidavit to Sales Tax Office that even though quotation/ estimate was issued by him but TV was never sold any customer can take quotations/ estimates and for what purpose cutomer uses the quotation he has no concern.
Mr. RAhul taking the copy of affidavit from Sales Tax Department files a case u/s 156(3) crpc against Ms. Amit for cheating and forgery u/s u/s 420,465,468,471, 120-B. Said FIR gets registered in police station.
After investigation Police inspector files Final report stating no forgery done by Mr. Amit as shopkeeper only issued the quotation and its very common thing that shopkeepers often sell the articles on quotation/ estimates. So no case made out on Mr. Amit, hence Final report
Magistrate also agreed with Police inspector and accepts the final report.
Question: Any citation/ judgments against this episod of magistrate which says legally quotation / estimate is not legal proof of sale, even though issued by shopkeeper but knowingly Mr. Amit used it for his unlaw gainful purpose?? I hope I'm clear this time.
Shonee Kapoor
(Expert) 26 September 2011
GO AND STUDY MARWAH VS MARWAH JUDGEMENT, AND USE IT TO FILE A CASE FOR USING FABRICATED DOCUMENT IN COURT PROCEEDINGS.
REGARDS,
SHONEE KAPOOR
HARASSED.BY.498A@GMAIL.COM
ESTHERPRIYA
(Expert) 26 September 2011
Not able to get your question clearly
Chetan Padm
(Querist) 26 September 2011
Hello Shonee, case was already filed and FIR was registered u/s 420,465,468,471, 120-B, but police filed final report in favour of accused that estimates/ bill produced in the court by accused are not fabricated by them and it was given by the shopkeepers and as it is they have submitted in court ...so no case.
shopkeepers say no sale made on it but agrees that estimates/ kachi rasid are issued by them.
Accused say: we bought the article (stridhan) on estimates only as given by shopkeeper and he never gave pukka rasid.
Question of Law is : court accepts estimates /kachi receipt as proof of sale of articles and admits it as evidence in IPC 406 case against me, is it valid??
on estimates/ kucha rasid even issued by shopkeeper, good worth lakhs can be issued back dated and there is no record for it in their accounts.
Chetan Padm
(Querist) 26 September 2011
as far has Marvah Vs Marvah a seperate case filed under s. 340 read with 195(2)(B) is already pending with Magistrate.
prabhakar singh
(Expert) 26 September 2011
It appears the facts are being misunderstood
every where by every one.
To me what shopkeeper has been saying that he has not sold any article to the person holding the receipt which in fact is not a sale receipt but a simple QUOTATION.
TO understand it one need to comprehend that suppose X intends to buy a television 24"and visits at shop of Y AND Z TO ASK FOR THEIR QUOTE PRICE ON WHICH THEY WOULD LIKE TO SALE THE SAME,Y GIVES A QUOTATION FOR 24000/=WHILE Z GIVES FOR 24500/=COMPARING THE TWO PRODUCTS X FIND BOTH THE PRODUCT SAME, DIFFERENCES IN PRICE ONLY DUE TO BRAND EQUITY.
X DECIDES TO BUY FROM Y,Y SHALL NOW ALSO ISSUE A RECEIPT OF PURCHASE.X SHALL NOT RETURN QUOTATION ISSUED EARLIER BY Y AND Z.NOR Y OR Z WILL ASK IT BACK.
X DID NOT PURCHASE FROM Z BUT STILL POSSESS
THE QUOTATION ISSUED BY Z BUT THAT QUOTATION IS NOT THE PROOF OF PURCHASE.
WHILE PURCHASE WAS MADE FROM Y,Y ISSUED SEPARATELY A RECEIPT OF SALE/PURCHASE OTHER THAN HIS QUOTATION ISSUED EARLIER.THE QUOTATION HERE MAY AT BEST SERVE THE PURPOSE OF CORROBORATIVE EVIDENCE.
If you have understood it so as shown and illustrated by me re frame your question,which so far has not been intelligible to me.
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 27 September 2011
I support the example of prabhakar singh but still the basic case law on the subject matter demanded by querist has not been cited by anyone.
Chetan Padm
(Querist) 27 September 2011
Dear Prabhakar Sir, Let me make your illustration simple.
Mr. Amit get a quotation/ estimate for a TV worth 70000/- from shopkeeper to be given in marraige.
Mr. Amit never buys it. Marriage is disputed. Mr. Amit uses the the quotation / estimate to prove that TV worth 70000/- was given in marriage to put case under 406IPC, and should be returned.
Magistrate takes cognizance against Mr. Rahul u/s 406IPC.
Mr. Rahul goes to sales tax department and lodge a complaint against shopkeeper that he is involved in black marketing and selling goods on estimates/ quotations and escaping VAT and sales tax.
Shopkeeper files affidavit to Sales Tax Office that even though quotation/ estimate was issued by him but TV was never sold any customer can take quotations/ estimates and for what purpose cutomer uses the quotation he has no concern.
Mr. RAhul taking the copy of affidavit from Sales Tax Department files a case u/s 156(3) crpc against Ms. Amit for cheating and forgery u/s u/s 420,465,468,471, 120-B. Said FIR gets registered in police station.
After investigation Police inspector files Final report stating no forgery done by Mr. Amit as shopkeeper only issued the quotation and its very common thing that shopkeepers often sell the articles on quotation/ estimates. So no case made out on Mr. Amit, hence Final report
Magistrate also agreed with Police inspector and accepts the final report.
Question: Any citation/ judgments against this episod of magistrate which says legally quotation / estimate is not legal proof of sale, even though issued by shopkeeper but knowingly Mr. Amit used it for his unlaw gainful purpose?? I hope I'm clear this time.
prabhakar singh
(Expert) 27 September 2011
TO MY MIND THE MAGISTRATE HAS WRONGLY PROCEEDED UNDER SECTION 406 IPC BELIEVING THAT QUOTATION SO ISSUED IS PROOF OF PURCHASE OF THE ARTICLE QUOTED THERE.
HIS VERY COGNIZANCE U/S 406 IPC DESERVES THE CHALLENGE SINCE A QUOTATION CAN NEVER BE CONCEIVED TO BE A RECEIPT OF PURCHASE OR SALE.
THE PROCEEDINGS U/S 420,465,468,471, 120-B SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN LODGED AS THE QUOTATION IN POSSESSION OF COMPLAINANT SEEKING ACTION UNDER S/406 CAN NEVER BE CALLED A FABRICATED DOCUMENT IN VIEW OF THE ADMISSION MADE BY THE SHOP OWNER THAT HE HAS ISSUED IT.
TO ME IT WAS MISCONCEIVED ACTION INITIATED.
prabhakar singh
(Expert) 27 September 2011
ONE THING MORE WAS THERE ANY RECOVERY OF [SAY TV] MADE FROM ACCUSED AND THE ACCUSED DOES NOT HAVE ITS PURCHASE RECEIPT????????.
Chetan Padm
(Querist) 27 September 2011
406IPC was private complaint case and not state case so no recovery so far, its at discharge stage 245 crpc
