9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (2) TMI 177X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ying in the pay order account of M/s. Times Travels Cargo (M/s. TTC for short) in the Union Bank of India, Versova Branch and the amount of Rs. 10,01,010/- seized on 2-6-1997 lying in the pay order account of M/s. TTC in Syndicate Bank, Jogeshwari Branch plus bank charges of Rs. 3010/- paid by TTC under the provisions of Section 121 of the Customs Act. Out of this amount, pursuant to the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, in Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No. 793/98 and amount of Rs. 68,00,000/- was put in Fixed Deposit vide FD No. 5520758 dated 20-5-1998 with Union Bank of India, Hill Road Branch, Bandra West in the joint names of Assistant Director of DRI Mumbai and M/s. Wall Street Finance Ltd. were ordered to be confiscated to the Govt. of India account forthwith. He also ordered further that only an amount of Rs. 23 lakhs out of total amount of Rs. 54,75,750/- could be identifiable with the proceeds of smuggled TCs and therefore, he ordered confiscation of Rs. 23 lakhs under the provisions of Section 121 of the Customs Act, 1962 and ordered Wall Street Finance Ltd., the appellant to pay the said amount forthwith. He also ordered confiscation of Rs. 9.5 lakhs and R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eement Forms (PAF). In the said contracts there was a clause about money laundering. The following were the cautions given to M/s. TTC : "6.1 It is an offence to assist anyone whom you know, or suspect to be laundering money from any criminal sources. Assistance could involve providing traveller's cheques to conceal the true ownership of the proceeds of a crime. As the sub-agent of the bank you are required to be aware of this threat. 6.2 Time Travel Cargo is required to exercise "know your customer" (KYC) and exercise the normal due diligence on all customers and branches whom Time Travels Cargo proposes to stock with travellers cheques. It will be the sole responsibility of Time Travels Cargo and their branches to sell the Visa Travellers Cheques strictly in compliance of FERA and certain exchange control regulations in India at all times. The Wall Street Banking Corporation Ltd. is no way accepts responsible for any violation of exchange control regulation committed by Time Travels Cargo or any of their branches. 6.3 Time Travels Cargo is required to furnish on a weekly basis daily settlement advises along with purchase agreements to Wall Street ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... culated on the dollar exchange rate on the value of the TCs sold. M/s. WSFL on request would delay the deposit of the cheques. In certain cases the cheques bounced. In this situation, he would replace the cheques with demand drafts. He would sell the TCs against cash only because he could take cash up to Rs. 50,000/- only to each passenger, sale of US$ 1200 was being shown. He deposed inter alia that these TCs were not sold to genuine foreign bound passengers but that the same were made in the name of the persons whose passports were in their possession. All the other documents were forged by him and his employees including the signatures of the passengers. The PAF would not contain the date so that the date of the cheques could be masked. These cheques could be sold in the black market (hawala market). Foreign exchange was also similarly sold. The PAF would repeatedly used for authenticating such bogus sales. The cash generated was put in the bank accounts and sent to M/s. WSFL as sale proceeds. The rate at which he would sell the travellers cheques was higher than the authorised bank rates. Such fraudulent sales were made to two persons viz. Iqbal Kapadia and Salim. In this manne ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... after hearing the ld. Counsel on behalf of M/s. WSFL dealt with the various issues and inflicted the penalties as mentioned in the said order. Hence, this appeal. 6.Shri V.S. Nankani, Advocate appeared for the appellant and Shri A.K. Chatterjee, SDR appeared for the Department. 7.Shri Nankani argued with his marked ability that the respondent in law could not have confiscated Rs. 68 lakhs and Rs. 23 lakhs in terms of provisions of Section 121 of the Customs Act. He further argued that the order imposing penalty of Rs. 20 lakhs on the appellants for violation of Section 114(1) of the Customs Act is wrong in law. He stated specifically that as far as violation of Section 121 of the Act is concerned, (i) that a person must sell the smuggled goods; (ii) the persons selling the smuggled goods must have a knowledge or reason to believe that the goods were smuggled goods; (iii) the sale proceeds of such smuggled goods must be available for confiscation. He stated that all the 3 ingredients are absent in this case. (He relies on the words "in the hands of the smuggler or his accomplices" contained in the section are important asserts Shri Nankani). He also relied the statement of obje ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cided by the courts in India as well as the courts in England. It would be interesting to refer to the views of Sir John Paget who states that the relationship of banker and customer is primarily that of debtor and creditor, the respective positions being determined by the existing state of the account. Instead of the money being set apart in a safe room, it is replaced by a debt due from the banker. The money deposited with him becomes his property and is absolutely at his disposal, and, save as regards the following of trust funds into his hands, the receipt of money by a banker from or on account of his customer constitutes him merely the debtor of the customer with the 'superadded' obligation to honour his customer's cheques drawn upon his balance, insofar as the same is sufficient and available. To the same effect, see Dharmdas v. Gangadevi (ILR 39 Bom. 88) Ishur v. Jiban (ILR 16 Cal. 25), Official Assignee, Madras v. Smith (ILR 32 Mad. 68) and London Joint Stock Bank v. Macmillan (1918) AC 777." H.P. Sheldon in his Practice and Law of Banking sets out this relationship as follows : "The banker when he receives money from a customer does not hold the money in a fiduciary c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 26, Fiancene v. Brawn (1888) 124 US 385, Allen v. Saint Louis (1887) 120 US 20, Leather Manufacturers National Bank v. Morgan (1886) 111 US 96, Pheoni Bank v. Risley (1884) 111 US Central National Bank v. Connectional (1881) 104 US 54, Seammon v. Kimball (1876) 92 US 362. Corpus Juris gives the following information : Sec. 326: "The contract between a bank and a depositor is not materially different from any other contract by which one person becomes bound to take charge of and repay another's funds, and there is no trust relation between a bank and a general depositor. The relation between a bank and a depositor may be dual in character, the bank being the depositor's debtor with respect to one thing and his agent with respect to another, or his debtor at one time and his agent at another; and while the relation between the bank and a depositor in respect to a general deposit is generally regarded as that of a debtor and creditor, yet in another sense the depositor is the owner of the deposit, in that he can demand repayment at any time. It is competent for a bank of deposit to enter into a collateral agreement with the depositor with reference to the disposition of the procee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... kani in developing the point further also argued that it is not as if only the authors of the Banking Law have written in this way, but even there are Indian cases on the subject. He invited our attention to the judgment of the Bombay High Court in (1) Hanuman Bank Ltd. v. K.P.T. Nadar and Ors. (1956) 26 Com. Cas. 81 (2) Velji Lakhamsey Co. v. Dr. Banaji (1955) 25 Comp. Cas. 395, (3) Textile Traders Syndicate Ltd. v. State of U.P. (AIR 1960 Allahabad 405 and (4) Kishore Shankar Signapurkar v. State of Maharashtra Ors. (1997) IV LJ 793 (Bom.). It is argued by Mr. Nankani therefore, that, once the amount received by Ratiwala which was deposited in his bank account then the same was ceased to be the sale proceeds of smuggled goods. What WSFL received was the money received within the banks own end i.e. bank's money and therefore, such an amount does not have taint of Section 121 of the Customs Act. It is emphasised by Mr. Nankani because in view of the fact bank had already issued the pay orders in the name of the appellants. When such action is taken the bank immediately debit the amount of the customer at whose instance the pay order is issued. The money would have continued to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to Arab Financial Services. He states and argues that all these actions have been taken in accordance with law and in accordance with, according to him, the instructions of Arab Financial Services. The action on the part of the appellants writing a letter to Bank of Madura for payment of US $ 2,95,250/- cannot be termed as aiding and abetting. Because act of aiding and abetting must be freezing the principle of main offence. Hereafter the completion of the principle of main offence viz. May, 1997 the remittance had taken place admittedly June, 1997 so the question of appellants involved in the direct smuggling of travellers cheque could not arise at all. TTC is an independent entity. Appellants have no control over the activities of TTC and if at all any one to be blamed it is the action of TTC which is wrong. He also made reference to clause 6.2 of the agreement with TTC which provides that it shall be the sole responsibility of TTC the said travelling cheque on compliance in the provisions of Exchange Control Regulations. He also quoted that the appellants had informed the RBI and RBI had clarified that FFMCs are expected to follow the terms and conditions of the licence issued ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... raph 5 which reads as under : We"5. have heard both the sides and have gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. We have also perused the statement of facts, grounds of appeal and the relief claimed in the appeal. The appellant has not challenged valuation aspect at all anywhere. Shri Lakshikumaran, the ld. Advocate had argued on the valuation aspect and Shri Durghayya, the ld. JDR had opposed the argument of the ld. Advocate on the ground that it was to open to the appellant to argue on this point as this issue was not raised in the grounds of appeal and it was raised for the first time in the arguments before the Tribunal. The applicant has not filed any application seeking permission of the Tribunal for amending its grounds of appeal. Apparently, it is a fresh ground which has been taken before the Tribunal. The powers of the Tribunal that expressed in widest possible term are restricted to the subject-matter of the appeal by virtue of the word "thereon" used in the provisions. This view was expressed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hukumchand Mills Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax reported in 1967 AIR (S.C) 455. Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tterjee, has been confiscated in the hands of banks lying in the A/c of M/s. TTC and before the same been credited in the appellant's account. Therfore, it is argued that M/s. WSFL does not have locus standi to maintain an appeal on the question of confiscation on this short point alone. It is emphatically argued by him if at all any person who could be aggrieved against this impugned order it could only be the bank in whose hands the amount has been confiscated or TTC from whose A/c the money has come out Customs department instead of being the finance company viz. WSFL. He emphasises the fact that the amount in question never reached the A/c of M/s. WSFL in Vijaya Bank. They were intercepted before it could reach the property of WSFL. He tries to distinguish the judgment in Bombay High Court in Lloys Bank Ltd., 1933 (36) BLR 88 case. He also stated that it will be incorrect to mean that Wall Street Finance Ltd. as the owner of the money even before the receipt of the Vijaya Bank, the banker of Wall Street. In this connection, it is argued by Shri Chatterjee against the seizure, a Writ Petition was filed in the High Court and the matter was also taken to Supreme Court. High Court ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dmitted that on 26-5-1997 he obtained blank stock of TCs worth US $1,90,000/- and he sold this to Shri Iqbal Kapadia and collected cash which were deposited in the bank. Thereafter he obtained the two pay orders in question totally Rs. 68 lakhs in favour of M/s. WSFL and handed over it to them. Iqbal Kapadia stated that (page 30 of the Department's paper book) that he was purchasing the traveller's cheque and he corroborates Riyaz Ratiwala's statement. He further invited our attention to the provisions of Foreign Exchange Regulation Act to say that currency includes TCs as well. In this case TCs have been sought to be smuggled out. Therefore, in terms of Section 2(22) of the Customs Act goods includes currency and negotiable instruments, the provisions of Sec. 121 is applicable. He also invited our attention to pages 6 7 of the Department Paper Book which would show that w.e.f. 21-3-1997 i.e. the date on which Wall Street entered into an agreement for supply of TCs to TTC up to 27-5-1997 works out to US $ 38,12,100 i.e. approx. Rs. 15 crores and investigation in this connection revealed that all these TCs have been issued to bogus passengers against bogus air ticket and none of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that there has been violation. He emphasised the fact that appellant cannot maintain this appeal. If at all anybody who is aggrieved against this order, it could not be the appellant. 10.In reply the ld. Counsel invited our attention to grounds B, D, E, F, M of the Grounds of Appeal and he invited specifically our attention to the prayer in the appeal which states that the impugned order passed by the respondent be set aside which includes the Order-in-Original in entirety and return of Rs. 6,83,010/-. He distinguished the case of Premier Brass Metal Works P. Ltd. (supra) cited by Shri Chatterjee, SDR. The facts are not similar to those case because in that case, it is a case of valuation and while the appeal was filed only with respect to classification. Here the case of confiscation and the interpretation of Sec. 121 and both have been argued at length in terms of the grounds taken. As far as the seizure instrument have taken place in the hands of Wall Street Finance Ltd. Inasmuch as the amount representing the pay orders, the appellants were the beneficiary under that instrument but for the stop payment instructions by DRI. He also invited our attention to the High Court's O ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ous case laws cited by the ld. Counsel Shri Nankani referred to in the argument portion culminating with the judgment of Supreme Court in S.P. Jain's case (supra). When the Banker is the owner of the money who can use the money deposited with it in the way it pleases? How could Wall Street Finance Ltd. challenge the confiscation? Section 129A of the Customs Act provides as follows : Any person"(i) aggrieved by any of the following orders may appeal to the Appellate Tribunal against such orders :" When the law of the land is that the moneys deposited in the bank becomes its money, how could Wall Street Finance Ltd. felt aggrieved against the impugned order? The SCN dated 4-11-1997 does not refer to the bank as one of the noticees. This is evident from page 75 of the SCN which indicates parties to whom notice was sent and bank is not one of its party. However, if one were to see the impugned order passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) it indicates that the same has been sent to Union Bank of India, Hill Road Branch, Union Bank of India, Versova Branch and Syndicate Bank Jogeshwary (W) Branch. What prevented these banks from challenging it? It is not pleaded before us ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gument of Shri Chatterjee regarding the mischief rule and the application of the decisions of the Tribunal in Premier Brass and Metal Works, 1990 (48) E.L.T. 98 and Commercial Clearing Agencies P. Ltd., 1985 (21) E.L.T. 592 (T) are of academic nature and not taken up for consideration at all. As far as confiscation of Rs. 23 lakhs is concerned it has been rightly contended by the ld. DR that there is no whisper of the same in the grounds of appeal. In para 6 of the appeal the appellant talks about seizure of Rs. 68,03,010/- and in paragraph 8 it states that they were called upon as to why the said amount cannot be confiscated. It has been rightly pointed out by the Commissioner in page 27 of the impugned order, in paragraph (o) as to why the confiscation of Rs. 23 lakhs has been made under Sec. 121 of the Customs Act. In view of the fact that there is no specific prayer made in that regard and in view of the fact that judgments cited above applies to the facts of the case as far as Rs. 23 lakhs is concerned. The judgment cited above will be applicable to the facts of this case as far as this amount is concerned. We are, therefore, of the view that the arguments of the appellants fa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... only an agent and when they sell the travellers cheque they have to follow what is contained in clause (11) of the Memorandum of Instructions to FFMC. The following conditions have been set out in page 7 :- "Conditions : (ii) While selling exchange in terms of paragraph 1(i), full fledged money changers should adhere to the following conditions. 1. In case where sale of foreign exchange is equivalent to Rs. 50,000/- or more, the rupee payment should not be accepted in cash but should invariably be received in the form of a crossed cheque drawn on the applicant's bank account or on the bank account of the firm/company sponsoring the business visit of the applicant. Payment in the form of Banker's Cheque/Pay Order/Demand Draft may also be accepted provided the Bankers' Cheque/Pay Order/Demand Draft is accompanied by a certificate from the bank issuing the instrument certifying that the funds for the instrument have been received by debit to the customer's bank account. The relative certificate should be kept on the records for inspection by Reserve Bank. In no circumstances should payments equivalent of Rs. 50,000/- or more be accepted in cash. 2. The sale of foreign e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y dealing with the aspects of violations under Customs Act which requires us to come to a conclusion on the basis of preponderance of probabilities. What are they? In spite of the fact that the Nair's statement referred to in show cause notice clearly shows that even in foreign exchange matter the appellants have shown a peculiar attitude towards the money changes. The explanation given by the appellants towards the numerous irregularities committed by TTC, namely financial accommodation given to Riyaz Retiwala would clearly show that the appellants have participated in the entire course of funds. Further act of giving clearance to Bank of Madura and remitting huge sums to Arab Financial Services subsequent to caution given by the DRI would clearly show that a reasonable man would not have been done but for his connivance in the violations and but for such a violation foreign currency could not have been attempted to export improperly. We are of the view that the penalty levied on the appellants is clearly correct in law in the facts and circumstances of the case. 23.As the appeal involves dealing in foreign exchange we are ordering the registry to send a copy of the order to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the amounts of Rs. 68,03,010/- lying in the pay order account of TTC should not be confiscated. The show cause notice also alleges that they were liable to penalty specifically for the offences relating to smuggling of foreign currency and travellers cheques. The Commissioner ordered confiscation of Rs. 23 lakhs which was in possession of WSFL as security amount as also the amounts which were in transit from TTC to them via banking channels. The amounts are claimed by WSFL as their legitimate dues from TTC. Even if it is argued that the monies deposited by them in the bank were not owned by them but that they belonged to the bank, it has to be accepted that they had an actionable claim. The order impugned before us has already resulted in deprivation of the monies deposited by M/s. WSFL in the bank and also the monies in transit to them from the bank. The impugned order also cast a liability on them to pay the sum of Rs. 20 lakhs as penalty. If their right to file an appeal is refused and at the same time the liability cast upon them to pay the penalty is not removed, then there is no doubt in my mind that a tremendous prejudice would be caused to M/s. WSFL. 31.In the light of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ansformed into different goods and ceased to be those goods which were smuggled. This transformation prevented Customs from confiscating the gold. These two problems were sought to be overcome by enacting Sections 120 and 121 to enable confiscation of the smuggled goods in spite of any change in their physical characters and also enabling Customs to confiscate the sale proceeds of smuggled goods. 36.Similar back up legislation was inducted earlier also in the form of introduction of Chapters IVA and IVB whereby goods prone to smuggling inwards and outwards were identified and restrictions were imposed on dealing with such goods. A set of documents was prescribed for dealers. This was designed to prevent absorption of goods smuggled inward as also making it difficult to make available the goods for smuggling outwards. 37.The Sec. 121 has a built in provision to safeguard the persons who sold certain goods which were smuggled in nature but where the person was not aware that what he was selling were smuggled goods. The section requires for the fact to be established that the person had the knowledge or reason to believe that the goods sold by him were smuggled goods. 38.With th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as sale proceeds thereof. He admitted that the PAFs prepared by them were results of fraudulent sales of TCs. Similar admissions were made by Mr. Sameer Younous Shaikh and Shri Sanjay Bansilal Gavit, other employees of M/s. TTC. The SCN does not indicate that these statements were retracted. These statements corroborate the initial admission made by Shri R. Retiwala and Iqbal Kapadia and establish the admissibility of evidence contained in the statements later retracted. Shri Riyaz Ratiwala, brother of Riyaz Retiwala had also in his statement made clear admission that Riyaz was selling to Iqbal Kapadia TCs in a fraudulent manner. 40.The analysis above clearly indicate that Shri Riyaz Retiwala was converting blank TCs into encashable TCs which were negotiable instruments with the clear knowledge that these same were being created in the name of bogus passengers on forged signatures on the basis of the passports which were taken away from their owners. Thus, the TCs were, at their very birth goods "attempted to be exported" in contravention of provisions imposed under the relevant Acts and as such were liable to confiscation under provisions of Sec. 113(d) of the Customs Act, 1962 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d as far back as 1584 when Hyden's case was decided that for the sure and true interpretation of all Statutes in general (be they penal or beneficial, restrictive or enlarging of the common law) four things are to be discerned and considered : 1st - What was the common law before the making of the Act, 2nd - What was the mischief and defect for which the common law did not provide, 3rd - What remedy the Parliament hath resolved and appointed to cure the disease of the commonwealth, and 4th - The true reason of the remedy; and then the office of all the judges is always to make such construction as shall suppress the mischief, and advance the remedy, and to suppress subtle inventions and evasions for continuance of the mischief, and pro privato commodo, and to add force and life to the cure and remedy according to the true intent of the makers of the Act, pro bono publico." 46.As I have brought out above, before the introduction of Sections 120 and 121 the mischief and defect was that once the smuggled goods had changed their form or once the smuggled goods were sold for consideration, no remedy was available to the officers to bring the smugglers to justice. This defect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t that the liability would continue even if the sale proceeds are received in good faith during the course of ordinary business. I shall later revert to the culpability of M/s. WSFL in dealing with the imposition of penalty upon them. 50.The amount of Rs. 68,03,010/- being the sale proceeds of goods attempted to be smuggled by M/s. TTC to M/s. WSFL was therefore correctly held liable to confiscation u/s. 121 of the Act. 51.The next question for consideration is whether amount of Rs. 23,00,000/- appropriated by M/s. WSFL out of the deposits and securities kept by M/s. TTC are so liable u/s. 121 or not. 52.The origin of these funds was disclosed by Riaz Ratiwala in his statement. M/s. TTC were authorised money changers w.e.f. June, 1996. Prior to the dealing in TCs, M/s. TTC were dealing in foreign currency acquired from M/s. WSFL and from other FFMCs. He deposed what he was selling foreign currency notes to Salim and Iqbal at the rate higher than the selling rate in the market. He further deposed that the funds deposited by him in his own name with M/s. WSFL in pursuance of the contract between M/s. WSFL and M/s. TTC were generated out of the sales of such foreign exchange and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f which were confiscated. The provisions of Section 114 would, therefore, still be attracted on M/s. WSFL if they had committed certain acts of omission or commission in relation to the smuggling of TCs. 59.Both M/s. WSFL and M/s. TTC were FFMCs. The conditions prescribed by the Reserve Bank of India were the same for both. 60.M/s. WSFL entered into an agreement on 26th December, 1996 with M/s. Arab Financial Services Company, Bahrain (hereinafter called as M/s. AFS). In terms of this agreement M/s. AFS was to provide to M/s. WSFL, AFS Visa Travellers Cheques for sale to eligible passengers in India against Indian rupees. The sale proceeds were to be remitted to M/s. AFS at weekly intervals. M/s. WSFL was to get a commission of 0.2%. Thereafter M/s. WSFL commenced the sale of such Travellers cheques (TCs) to other licensed FFMCs. On June 12, 1997, M/s. WSFL informed the R.B.I. of the situation and claimed that if the other FFMCs misuse the facility, they would not be responsible for such misuse. It was claimed that the R.B.I. was the only authority to monitor such misuse. The R.B.I. gave a non-committal reply on 5-7-1997 saying that they expected the FFMC to follow the terms an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... they entered into an agreement with M/s. TTC. In the light of the specific caution given about money laundering, it would be interesting to see as to what precautions were taken by M/s. WSFL to ensure that M/s. TTC would keep their side of the bargain. The agreement between M/s. WSFL and M/s. TTC prescribed elaborate documentation to be done by M/s. TTC. The Purchase Agreement Forms were very important documents. The Agreements were tied up with daily settlement advises and remittance of specific amounts relatable to the sales of TCs made by M/s. TTC. It would be interesting to see how M/s. WSFL overlooked the performance of this agreement. 63.Shri Riyaz Ratiwala narrated the manner in which the money was generated to settle with M/s. WSFL. M/s. was giving blank cheques to M/s. WSFL. M/s. WSFL were obliging Shri Riyaz Retiwala by not depositing the cheques for the requested durations. Even when M/s. TTC cheques had bounced M/s. WSFL turned a blind eye. As per the statement of Shri Nair although the agreement was for supply of TCs to the limit of US$ 1,00,000/-, the ceiling was raised to US$ 2,00,000/- without any amendment on the direction of the Chairman of M/s. WSFL. His state ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
