–lawyer says as $1B suit hearing opens
Attorney Edward Luckhoo yesterday described the New Building Society’s (NBS) move to dismiss his client, Maurice Arjoon, as akin to a fishing expedition.
“They were throwing a cast net,” Luckhoo said, while referring to the letter of dismissal sent to Arjoon, which was signed by then chairman of NBS Dr Nanda K Gopaul.
The trial into the lawsuit filed against the NBS by Arjoon and another former manager, Kissoon Baldeo, began yesterday before Justice Brassington Reynolds with testimony from an employee of the Deeds Registry, following the settling of issues raised by lawyers representing NBS.
In 2010, former Director/Secretary Arjoon and former Assistant Mortgage Manager Baldeo, filed separate lawsuits totalling $1 billion. Only Arjoon was present at yesterday’s hearing.
In their writs, they each asked the court for a total of $500 million for wrongful dismissal, unlawful removal from office, a breach of contract of employment, pension among other things.
Attorney for Arjoon, Luckhoo submitted that his client began his employment at NBS on December 1, 1977 as an assistant accountant and was later appointed to Director/Secretary on February 21, 2002.
He noted that on August 14, 2007 his client received a letter of dismissal from then Chairman of the NBS, Dr Gopaul. He noted that the dismissal came without notice and without payment of any severance benefits.
Luckhoo went on to explain that based on the letter, his dismissal came as a result of the unauthorised withdrawal of funds from the account of Bibi Khan, due to fraud, dereliction of duty, negligence and/or serious misconduct. He said the letter stated that following an investigation the board took a decision to dismiss Arjoon with immediate effect.
The attorney, who was reading from a copy of the letter, said it stated that refund of his client’s contribution to the company’s pension scheme will be settled by the trustees.
What was significant about the letter, Luckhoo said, was that NBS sought to dismiss Arjoon based on several “alternate allegations.”
According to the letter, Arjoon did not take part in the investigation but Luckhoo noted that this would be outlined in correspondence sent by Arjoon’s then attorney Anil Nandlall by way of letters dated August 7, 2007 and August 8, 2007 to Gopaul.
“They are saying that he was negligent because he did not check the power of attorney and its origin,” Luckhoo said, adding that if this was the case then every person acting on a power of attorney must conduct the process of hand writing expertise.
He said the evidence will show that his client followed all practices and procedures were followed.
Amanda Gobin, a legal clerk attached to the power of attorney desk at the Deeds Registry for the last two months, was called as the first witness. She testified that under the Deeds Act, the Registrar is responsible for keeping a register of power of attorney and a record of the actual power of attorney.
According to Gobin, the record of the power of attorney is kept in a power of attorney register under the custody of the Registrar of Deeds in the Deeds Registry.
She indicated that she had the register of power of attorney for 2006.
When reference was made to a particular power of attorney number, she read out to the court from the register that the general power of attorney was executed on September 12, 2006, with Bibi S Khan listed as the principal; the appointed person was listed as Compton Chase and it was filed on October 20, 2006.
According to Gobin, there is another book/register where powers of attorney are stored. She described that as a volume.
Asked if the information she had earlier read to the court was in the volume, she responded in the negative. She added that there is no note in either book as to why the power of attorney was removed.
The case continues on October 8, when Senior Counsel Ashton Chase will cross examine the witness.
Baldeo and Arjoon were among others who had been charged with fraud but during four separate preliminary inquiries they were freed on the grounds of insufficient evidence.
The other defendants in the case were Amrita Persaud, Kent Vincent, Ashley Legall, Imran Bacchus and Mohanram Shahebudin.
The fraud case comprised four separate preliminary inquiries. Over time, they were each dismissed for insufficient evidence.
Khan, from whom the $69 million was allegedly stolen, failed to attend court hearings.
She had appeared during the first Preliminary Inquiry, where she had given evidence but defence lawyers were unable to complete their cross-examination of her.
