Mental torture me Some H.H. Police King Dhahi Khalfan law Team Dubai FOR 14 YEARS no help uae Police
I WAS ATTACKED PERSONALLY Accordingly I was admitted in Dubai Hospital on 8th july 1999. On 9th july 1999 I received a call that I should take back all the cases against Raj Bernard and SCB and if I don’t do so then maybe during operation an accident can occur and I will be declared dead.My other 2 brother also expired 29/1/1999 & 7/5/1999 he received some Raj strange call
My other brother also expired
My other 2 brother also expired when visited Mumbai – at night he slept and other
Day did not wake up- he was all alone there – and he received some SCB strange call and was not alive
this is good that I have this proof – by Dubai Government that his death was on 29th January 1999. (if it would had been of some other country then they could say it is fake certificate)
File 13. CASE 157/ 2000 Khaleej time recd. Payment on 27th January 99
Below – Alliance Insurance policy confirms insurance date – starts from 28/1/99 to 27/1/00. ( no alteration in both these dates)
Exhibit no. 9. Hospital ID no. 7611331) Rashid hospital.
I am fighting against injustice since 14 years but no one cares to even listen. I am not doing this for myself I am bringing to your kind attention the misconducts, misdemeanor, frauds and criminal actions that even were causes of suicides in the city due to Raj, Standard chartered bank, and other legal/judicial/ protective authorities in Dubai who support crime.
Such people are being helped and those who live in Dubai, respectfully for more than 34 years without any criminal record are being tortured.
To suppress / hide one crime 100’s of crimes are made, thereafter. For one case injustice I lost two big brothers, in heart failure. In 98, 99 I suffered heart attacks and was even tried to kill. Threat was given to pressure me, that I would die on the operation table.
1st July 1999, Doctor Redhwan gave an un-fair statement that stent was not available, and it was cancelled just 5 minutes before the time of operation. 1st July 1999If the record of hospital will be checked you will see the same stent was used for another operation on the same day. I had date of 18/10/2011 Rashid hospital cancelled my Heart operation I did not attend, why central jail Nut sent me Heart operation
1st July 1999, hospital called me and asked me to get admitted on 8th july 1999– and that the stent was available. Accordingly I was admitted in Dubai Hospital on 8th july 1999. On 9th july 1999 I received a call that I should take back all the cases against Raj Bernard and SCB and if I don’t do so then maybe during operation an accident can occur and I will be declared dead. When my arteries were blocked as you can read – all the 3 – one 100%, one 90% and one 65% and if someone in this state receives a call in this way – then you can understand what can happen – he can die on the spot. And the next day really it happened – my operation was cancelled – Dr Redhwan cancelled the operation. This proves that so big hospital was also under the SCB and Raj, they had powers and Dr Redhwan was good as he could not kill me but cancelled the operation.
This statement proves that my operation is cancelled on 10th july 1999. In this manner they have pressurizeda heart patient by phone calls.
CRIME PLAYS WITH BRIBE LAW U A E? 100% EVIDENCE WITH PICTURE
CRIME PLAYS WITH BRIBE LAW U A E? 100% EVIDENCE WITH PICTURE
Below is the list of PDC cheques with due date and the cheque number.
Case no. 557/98, was dismissed. A 903/98&557/98.
This document is the auditing report of Al Rubaie and co . he is n authorized auditor and the Dubai court accepts his auditing report. This report was done for me in 1998 , because on February 7 1998 Raj , wrote a letter to Dubai dry docks to stop paying me and so all my cheques were bouncing from then on. I had submitted the below mentioned report to court in 1998. In UAE , charging interest is illegal and Raj had filed a wrong case on him making charges that I was charging interest on him. So I had submitted this report in the Dubai court
Case No: 577 of 1998, was dismissed.
Government of Dubai
Dubai Court of First Instance
Behalf of His Highness Sheikh Maktoum bin Rashid Al Maktoum, Ruler of Dubai
Public meeting held on ethane at the Dubai Court of First Instance.
Under the chairmanship of Mr. Justice: Fouad Mahmoud Amin Shalaby
The membership of:
Mr. Judge: Mohamed Hani
Mr. Judge: Ghassan al-Shawa
And the presence of Secretary: Abdullah Mohamed Ahmed
Issued the following provision
In Case No.: 577 of 1998 total commercial
Uploads: Pisco International (LLC. LLC. M. M)
Against: Dial Manso Khani
After reviewing the documents and hearing oral argument and deliberation
PO 2 continued rule in the proceedings 557 \ 1998 total trade
Tthsal facts - it shows the view from the papers - in that the Prosecutor
Argued about the defendant to judge my appoint an expert to determine the amount of the loan
And the amounts calculated from the portable dry basin Dubai, Mashreq Bank and Habib
Chartz Bank and Standard Bank for the defendant and inventory checks in the possession of the defendant
And determining the amounts of additional own and then be obligated to pay additional amounts in addition to expenses
She said her statement that, under an agreement concluded between them in the borrowed 23/07/1996
Of which $ 400,000 AED without Fouad and committed to remit installments of the amounts
Owed to it by the pool and Dubai Dry account with Mashreq Bank as collateral for the implementation of the obligation of restitution also handed over checks of the numbers 625347 to 625356 and
Sending it back once fully pay the entire loan Taking The total amounts received
Statement from both sides Safatty amount 1,544,599 AED, but he refused to re-team
P. 3 continued rule in the case 557 \ 1998 total trade
, Prompting a lawsuit to establish the above statement.
Provided Taida portfolio documents turned a copy of:
Of the loan contract concluded between them in the 07/23/1996.
Messages issued from the Dubai Dry Docks, and several banks to transfer funds from their account
To the account of the defendant.
Payroll calculation and disclosure checks delivered to him.
Photo penal provisions.
Such as a note guaranteed by the defendant and his defense based on the existence of
Financial transactions between them and the attached photocopies of several checks and accounting reports
3/21/1999 session and ruled the court appointment of an expert accounting for the statement 'What is the amount
Delivered from the defendant to the plaintiff and the percentage and total amount paid by him to
Heya and checks issued by him and appropriate at the failure of this expert and Managing Director
To provide for his request of the parties a hearing on 15.5.2000 replaced rivalry
P. 4 continued rule in the case 557 \ 1998 total commercial
The court held the sentencing hearing today, Deputy Prosecutor introduced and applied
To bring it back to the pleadings and annexed documents, pay attention to him the court.
Since the original clearance in humans and that the evidence of the alleged
And the right of denied based on this that if the plaintiff did not provide the same reasons,
Documents and data, it is considered to have failed to establish the right claimed by
And his claim should be dismissed.
Since it was obvious Prosecutor newspaper which reported her claim and a note
Defense that it is not merely a word sending it as there is no evidence that it provided
Documents does not indicate the fact contractual relations and the parties and the defendant Naqdha
Despite the Court's response to request appointment of an expert, but it could not be directly due to the Tax Office
Closed some time ago and then her claim to be non-support of fact and law
Rejection due to bind with their expenses pursuant to Article 133 of the Criminal Procedure Law
The below mentioned agreement proves that BESCO was supplying man power to dubai dry dock. And BESCO gets the payment after 60 days. Since the labor should be paid every one month , Mr Raj took 400,000 cash from me and gave me PDC cheques and said that Dubai Dry docks would transfer the money in to my account every month and I was deducting my installment amount and was paying the remaining amount. All the details of the cheques and cash that I had given to him are mentioned below.
محكمة دبي الابتدائية
باسم صاحب السمو الشيخ مكتوم بن راشد آل مكتوم حاكم دبي
بالجلسه العلنيه المعقودة يوم الاثين بمقر محكمة دبي الابتدائية .
برئاسة السيد القاضي : فؤاد محمود أمين شلبي
وعضويه كل من :
السيد القاضي : محمد هاني
والسيد القاضي : غسان الشوا
وحضور أمين السر : عبدالله أحمد محمد
أصدرت الحكم التالي
في الدعوي رقم : 577 لسنة 1998 تجاري كلي
المرفوعه من : بيسكو انترناشيونال (ش.ذ.م.م)
ضد : ديال مانسو خاني
بعد الاطلاع علي الأوراق وسماع المرافعه الشفوية والمداول
ص 2 تابع الحكم في الدعوى رقم 557\ 1998 تجارى كلي
تتحصل الوقائع – على ما يبين من مطالعة الاوراق – فى أن المدعيه
اختصمت المدعي عليه للحكم بتعين خبير حسابي لتحديد مبلغ القرض
والمبالغ المحموله من حسابها بحوض دبي الجاف وبنك المشرق وحبيب
بنك وستاندر تشارتز بنك لحساب المدعي عليه وحصر الشيكات التي بحوزة المدعى
وتحديد المبالغ الاضافيه الخاصة بها ثم الزامه بسداد المبالغ الاضافية بالاضافة الى المصروفات
وقالت بيانا لها أنه بموجب اتفاق مبرم بينها في 23-7-1996 اقترضت
منه مبلغ 400,000 درهم بدون فؤاد والتزمت بسداده مقسطا من مبالغ
مستحقة لها بحوض دبي الجاف ومن حسابها لدى بنك المشرق وكضمان
لتنفيذ التزامها بالرد سلمته ايضا الشيكات من أرقام 625347 الى 625356 وعلى
أن يعيدها بمجرد تمام دفع كامل القرض واذ بلغت جملة المبالغ التى حصل عليها
من الجهتين سالفتى البيان مبلغ 1,544,599 درهم الا انه رفض اعادة الفرق
ورد الشيكات وهددها بتقديم الشيكات للبنك مالم تحرر له شيكات اخرى
وبمبالغ اضافيه فانصاعت له وأصدرت له شيكات اضافيه وبتاريخ لاحق
اضطرت الي اقتراض مبلغ 300,000 درهم منه وتم سداده بالزياده حتى بلغ
جملة ما تقاضاه منها للقرضين مبلغ 700,000 درهم وبمطالبة برده امتنع
وابلغ الجهات المختصة ببعض الشيكات التى بحوزته وقضى ضدها فى احدهمها
ص3 تابع الحكم فى الدعوى رقم 557\1998 تجارى كلي
مما حدا بها الى اقامة الدعوى سالفة البيان .
وقدمت تأيدا حافظة مستندات طويت علي صورة من :
عقد من القرض المبرم بينهما في 23-7-1996.
رسائل صادرة منها لحوض دبي الجاف وعدة بنوك لتحويل مبالغ من حسابها
الي حساب المدعي عليه.
كشوف حساب وكشف بالشيكات المسلمة اليه .
صور أحكام جزائيه.
مثل المدعي عليه مذكرة ضمنتها دفاعه والقائم على وجود
تعاملات ماليه بينهما وأرفقت بها صور ضوئيه لعدة شيكات وتقارير محاسبي
وبجلسة 21-3-1999 قضت المحكمه بندب خبير محاسبي لبيان ما هية المبالغ
المسلمه من المدعي عليه للمدعيه ونسبتها وجملة ما سددته له منها
وما هية الشيكات التي أصدرتها له ومناسبة ذلك وازاء تقاعس الخبير المنتدب
عن تقديم تقريره طلب طرفى الخصومه بجلسة 15-5-2000 استبداله بالخبير
صاحب الدور التالي فقدم تقريرا بجلسة 5-2-2001 أورد به المدعيه
تخلفت عن الحضور رغم استدعاءها وأفاد وكيلها بأنها مغلقة منذ مدة وتعذر
عليه بالتالي الانتقال الي مقرها للاطلاع علي ما لديها من مستندات
ص4 تابع الحكم فى الدعوى رقم 557\1998 تجاري كلي
وقررت المحكمة اصدار الحكم بجلسة اليوم فقدم وكيل المدعيه طلبا
لاعادتها الي المرافعة وأرفق به مستندات تلتفت اليه المحكمة .
وحيث أن الاصل في الانسان براءة الذمة وأن البينة علي من ادعي
واليمين علي من أنكر وينبني علي ذلك أنه اذا لم يقدم المدعي مالديه من
مستندات وبيانات فانه يعتبر قد عجز عن اقامة الحق الذى يدعيه
ويتعين رفض دعواه .
لما كان ذلك وكان البين مما أوردته المدعية بصحيفة دعواها ومذكرة
دفاعها أنه لا يعدو أن يكون قولا مرسلا لا دليل عليه كما أن ما قدمته من
مستندات لا يدل علي حقيقة العلاقات التعاقديه وأطرافها وناقضها المدعى عليه
ورغم استجابة المحكمة لطلبها بندب خبير الا أنه تعذر مباشرة المأمورية بسبب
غلقها منذ مدة ومن ثم تكون دعواها على غير سند من الواقع والقانون
واجبة الرفض مع الزامها مصروفاتها عملا بالمادة 133 من قانون الاجراءات الجنائية
حكمت المحكمة برفض الدعوى وألزمت المدعية مصروفاتها ومبلغ
ألفين درهم مقابل أتعاب المحاماة
FOR 14 YEARS Mental torture me Dubai law Team
Each of these files is worth billions of dollars
These awards are worth billions of dollars today. Because of these awards I embarked on a world tour that took me to as far as the USA, UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand and during this tour, I received many awards. After this tour I decided to come back to Dubai, where it all started.
Before 1998 I had never been to any court, but after those two awards, the law became a weapon used by my enemies against me. The world respects UAE court award that is why many other courts called me to give their own award.
The minutes of the Public Prosecution beset with: Director of Bisco named Bernard Raj
Reopened the record on Monday, 15.03.1999 M in the 12 noon at the Public Prosecution
As today is the deadline for achieving the company with the Director of the World Bisco called Bernard RajI borrowed an amount of five hundred thousand dirhams from the accused Minsokany return, handed him three checks in that amount AED 100,000 and rolled Statendr Chartdr bank and the check is payable on 15.07.199--? AD has paid the full amount of the loan to the defendant at different times has not taken or recovered checks from the defendant on merit and after the due date are not entitled to claim its value has fulfilled it in all the debts after the due date requested by the accused Minsokany checks, but he told me he had Christnfez checks for the friendly and he is prepared to lend me any time I want a month ago Director called and learned that the accused had forged the due date in item Year
Note we have presented the check in question to a witness present
Q: Can we check the thermometer and you Bahrdah site by you?
A: I signed on the check Vtm The rest of the data printed by the bank in my presence and the bank manager and the employee concerned and signed on the back of the check to ensure the collection of value to the beneficiary on 07/15/199--?6 at maturity m
Q: Are you who you hand over a check for the invited Minsokany dayal A: Yes,
Name: Lawrence Bernard Korisaban Nationality: Indian Age: 42 years Date: 12/02/99 two checks (200000404975or76 ?
Yes I handed over the check with no data asked them to edit the amount of (200000) AED for the benefit of the beneficiary and then guaranteed to pay for the purpose of enabling me to get a loan from the called / humus - the part of banking facilities but I told the bank I can not meet the value of the check that date and requested an extension and was before the days of the date of Due the above-mentioned and already asked me to bring the check to them, where the Bank has changed the due date I signed the amendment reported at the front of the check as adopted by the Bank once again from behind and with respect to the change that I see now the most stylish of any in the box months, I do not think one may be caused by other than the beneficiary of any humus because the check has stayed with him until now and I would like to add that there are two checks others were Aatmahma to push the coffee one amount (200000) AED As to how any change to obliterate the ancient history and print the new date does not mention that he had been to check one or all of history, as is evident by check subject of this complaint and this can advise me on the validity of the overall sign.
The record closed on that at 2 pm and we decided the following:
First, ensure the continuation of the accused on bail earlier signed by the police.
Second, the presence of a request by the Director of a company called Global Bisco Nbernard Raj and the company accountant named Harry in the session to achieve M 15/03/1999
Reopened the record on Monday, 15/03/1999 m at exactly 12:30 pm at the Public Prosecution
Place: Investigation office – Registries
Name: Mohammad Abdullah Al Obaidally
Occupation : Lawyer
Age: 36 years old
Place of Birth: Abu Dhabi
Mothers Name Aziza
Residence Address: (Illigible) – Misherif
Work Address: Al Khaleej Advocates – Maktoum Street, Ras Al Khaima Bldg.
I, Lieutenant Abdul Magid Fadil, have written the testimony of the abovementioned person who is the reporter of this incident, he testified as follows:
Korespan Lawrence issued a cheque for the benefit of our client Mansukhani Dayal Hassaram, Indian national. The bank that the cheque drawn from – Standard Chartered have stamped and guaranteed the value of the cheque – or the cheque was verified and can be on its due date, considering that the bank had taken all necessary procedures before certifying and guaranteeing the value of the cheque, for which reason the beneficiary (our client) accepted the cheque.
When our client submitted the cheque, the bank refused to fulfill the cheque and told our client to refer to the drawer. This kind of procedure can only be done on normal cheques which are not certified or guaranteed. Our client attempted so many times to collect the amount of the cheque but the bank refused without any right, and that is a crime that the law punishes for according the article 402 of the Federall Punishment Law No. 3 of 1987.
S C BANK’ SOUR MIGHT IS RIGHT AND OUR MONEY CANS BY ANY CITIZEN ANY WHERE IN UAE. IN UAE EVERY WHERE WHERE S C BANK’ MONEY POWER IS THERE WE CAN MANIPULATE THE CIVIL LAW INTO CRIMINAL LAW AGAINST YOU AND WE WILL PROVE THAT WE ARE ALWAYS RIGHT EVEN IF WE INDEED WRONG OTHERWISE
Stewart Hamond Nationality: British
According to the copy, we were sure that the cheque was forge and that was why we refused to fulfill the cheque.
Place: Investigation office
Name: Stewart Hamond
Occupation: Chief of Investigation –investigation
Age: 40 years
Place of Birth: Britain
Mothers Name: Watson
Residence Address: Al Wasl near the Iranian
Work Address: Standard Chartered Bank
I, Lieutenant Abdul Magid Fadil, have written the testimony of the above mentioned person who is investigated in the fact of the returned cheque. He is the representative of the defendant bank. He testified as follows:
Yes, it happened that Korespan Lorence of Besco International Company have issued a cheque No. 404977 drawn from our bank on 15/7/96, or that is due date was for more than two years. TRhe cheque was actuallu certified by the bank to be fulfilled on its due date, but the benefiaciary did not forward the cheque until 15/7/98.
It was clear that there was an alteration on the date of the year which was changed for the same year. We had a copy of the same cheque that we took from the owner f the account when we suspected the cherub to be forged. According to the copy, we were sure that the cheque was forge and that was why we refused to fulfill the cheque.
They returned again on 22/7 after being visited by the bearer of the cheque the beneficiary – Mr. Dayal Mansukhani whereas he contacted the bank and the bank sent for receiving the matter and investigating the same, and told him the reason for not fulfilling the cheque. The amount is One Hundred thousand dirhams. It was a forgery on the cheque. Another cheque had been reviewed that is dated 15/10/98, it was also forged on the date of the year. The year was altered to 98 instead of 96, and the number of the cheque / 404976. He requested assistance on the matter, and I told him to write a letter to the bank and the bank would officially reply with the reasons for not fulfilling the cheque, but he submitted the cheque for the second time and it was again returned. He then wrote a letter to the bank that was received on 28/7/98 and we replied to him on the matter. As previously did and refused to cash the cheque.
On the same date, I met the lawyer of the drawer or Besco International and they owed the bank an amount more than one hundred thoudsand. There I found the ssame copy of the same cheques, that bear clearly the due year which is 1996. I took the copy from them. No, Irequested them to give me the copy f the cheque but they refused in the urgent meeting. And on 26/7/98, the said beneficiary sent us a copy of a letter written to the Cetral Bank, and did not add anything tothat when the cheque was submitted for the third time on 25/7/98.
The same cheque returned and on 2/8/98, I received a letter (copy) by fax from the lawyer of the beneficiary requesting fulfillment or cashing the cheque within three days, and did not add anything because the three days did not end yet – or still I have one day more to reply to them. On Sunday 30/8/98 I contacted the lawyer of he drawer (Besco International), they sent me three copies of the three cheques related to the subject in the name of the beneficiary and it was clear on the cheques in comparison with the furnished cheque that there is a forgery on the date.
I would like to add in my testimony that he book from which the cheques were taken (illegible) from the bank on 95 and one of the people who signed on the certification was Mr. Khorshid Anphala, who left the job on 96, and the second person was transferred to a branch of the bank in Qatar on 97 and the latter left our branch on April 96 after the certification, that clearly (illegible) that the alteration on the cheques was done on the certification after issuance of the cheques wa done on the certification after issuance of the cheques and that is a clear forgery for not having a signature on the alteration or on the erasure on the furnished cheque.
We are in the process of issuing a complaint to submit to the police- for the accusation of forgery and this is the letter of the bank for the complaint of this cheque, and I have explained to the beneficiary that if he wanted to make a complaint against anybody in this regard, we would be ready to forward the necessary assistance. This is my testimony and on it I sign.
. My witness e-mail address & fax
IN THE BAR COUNCIL OF U.A.E AT ABU DHABI PETITION NO. OF 2006
BAR COUNCIL OF U.A.E.2006
I even sent legal notices in 2006 and 2008 to Raj Bernard, Dar al Adallah, Haris Accounting and Auditing, Central bank of UAE and Standard chartered bank (UK London) for all the injustice I suffered.