THE FAKE LIQUIDATION OF NOELLA & ROSARIO CC

by Marco Accolla

Raakesh (Kadarnath) Maharaj : Attorney whose speciality is

liquidations.

Simi Maharaj : Liquidator, spouse of Raakesh Maharaj

Marco Rosario Accolla : Sole member of Noella & Rosario CC,

(effectively stole 50% of the membership from his partner)

Mohamed Afzal Ebrahim : Property Syndicate Kingpin in whose

name a R2.9million claim was submitted( not legitimate).

Michael Bradury : who submitted a false claim for R30 000 for

“consultation”

The information that follows in this Blog is a summary of the events as

they occurred.

The Documents contained in this Blog are copies of the actual documents

that have been filed with the Master of the High Court, The Companies

and Intellectual Property Commission, and the Specialised Commercial

Crime Unit , John Ross House, Durban

Should any information be inaccurate, we will be pleased to amend the

information if any affected person informs us of the inaccuracy and

provides us with the correct information.

This Blog is being presented as an “Actual Real-Life Experience that is

intended to Inform and Educate the Public” and the Blog Controllers will

not be liable for any comments from the Public.

…………………………….............…………………………………………………..

Application to Liquidate :

Marco Accolla was a Member of Noella & Rosario CC that was permitted by

agreement to use the trading name “Ooh La La Boutique” as Ooh La La was

the exclusive supplier of the goods. After 5 years, he demanded that his

partner pay him out. Whilst the sum being demanded was unrealistic, the

partner agreed as she found the he had committed certain fraudulent acts

that would tarnish the reputation of her respected business. However, his

demands kept changing and as Accolla acted in bad faith, no settlement was

reached.

He became vindictive and decided to prejudice (actually destroy) the

business as all the leases for Ooh La La Boutique were in the name of the

CC, even though the CC did not actually own all the shops. Some of the

shops were owned exclusively by his partner who started the business 35

years ago. Accolla had joined the business for 5 years.

Without informing his partner as he intended to severely prejudice his

partner, Accolla applied for the Voluntary Liquidation of the Close

Corporation, stating it was a “Voluntary Liquidation by Creditors”. This was

not necessary as the business was sound, had large cash reserves and was

trading very well. There were no creditors except Accolla’s partner and her

son who was the supplier of the goods to Accolla’s CC.

Accolla was aware that once a CC is liquidated, it cannot hold any leases.

His intention was to frustrate his partner into paying him out as the partner

would have to vacate the shops if the liquidation proceeded.

Accolla removed the cash reserves from the business account of the Close

Corporation. He transferred close to R1.8million out of the Close

Corporation’s Account into his personal account. His partner’s son’s

company supplied the goods to the CC. By removing the cash from the

business account, Accolla ensured that there were no funds left to pay for

goods.

Accolla’s friend Mohammed Afzal Ebrahim, the “kingpin of a property

syndicate” introduced him to attorney Raakesh Maharaj of K Maharaj Inc

of Masonic Chambers, Masonic Grove, Durban. (more about these two

individuals and their modus operandi in the last paragraph of this

article)

Maharaj, in his own handwriting, filled in the documents to apply to the

Companies and Intellectual Property Commission for the Voluntary

Liquidation of the CC. The information supplied in these forms was false.

Accolla and Maharaj also did not reflect the true position of the business –

the Statement of Affairs indicated debts that did not exist, and the assets of

the business were not indicated.

Maharaj cannot be excused for the submission of the false information as

he even submitted false claims for himself.

Some of the FALSE INFORMATION supplied to CIPC :

*Accolla declared that he was owed R5million by the CC.

*Maharaj declared that he was owed R400 000 by the CC.

*It was reflected that MA Ebrahim was owed R2million.

On 13th June 2014, based on the information that was supplied, CIPC

registered the Voluntary Liquidation of the CC.

Accolla and Maharaj then set about making application to the Master of the

High Court for the appointment of Liquidators. Once again documents

were supplied that contained fraudulent information.

These included the Nomination forms that would be used for the

appointment of the liquidators. Some of the Nomination forms were:

1. Accolla files a FALSE claim for R5million. He signs the form.

2. Maharaj files a FALSE claim for R120 000. He signs the form.

3. A nomination form for a FALSE claim for R7 million was filled in and a

signature FORGED.

4. A nomination form for a FALSE claim for R20 000 was filled in and a

signature FORGED.

Accolla proudly described Maharaj as being a “genius at work” in respect

of the manner in which he was applying for the Voluntary Liquidation.

Two liquidators were nominated : Abbas Latib and Co and Almenta Trust

(the liquidator at Almenta Trust is Simi Maharaj, wife of Raakesh Maharaj).

About 16 (Fake)Creditors were presented to the Master, totalling

over R16 million.

.....................................................................................

The 2 Liquidators that were nominated were appointed by the Master.

WHAT HAPPENED NEXT....... ARRESTS AND CHARGES

Mr NA (name has been abbreviated to protect the identity of the

complainant) lodged a complaint with the SAPS, that his information was

used deceptively and that his signature was forged.

Accolla’s partner also lodged a complaint with the SAPS. The matter was

registered at Durban Central Police Station under Cas No 500/11/2014 and

allocated to Colonel Moloi at the SCCU to investigate.

Marco Accolla was arrested and charged at the Commercial Crime Court on

7th September 2015 for Fraud, Forgery, Perjury and Uttering.

Raakesh Maharaj was arrested and charged at the Commercial Crime Court

on 29th September for Forgery, Perjury and Uttering.

They were granted R5000 bail each.

.....................................................................................

Court Appearances

7th September 2015 – MARCO ACCOLLA charged at the Commercial Crime

Court for Fraud, Forgery, Perjury and Uttering, Bail of R5000 granted

29th September 2015 – RAAKESH MAHARAJ charged at the Commercial

Crime Court for Fraud, Forgery and Uttering, Bail of R5000 granted

There were at least 10 more court appearances as the matter kept getting

adjourned.

.....................................................................................

THE ACCUSED : MARCO ACCOLLA RAAKESH MAHARAJ

Key Players in False Liquidation of Noella & Rosario cc

Raakesh Maharaj

Maharaj’s Role : Maharaj filled in the documents himself that were

submitted to CIPC. In one of the forms which was for UNSECURED

CREDITORS all the information was FALSE... Maharaj filled in his own

name on the form, indicating that he was owed R400 000.

Maharaj also filled in a Liquidator Nomination Form, appointing his wife as

the liquidator. He stated he was owed R120 000 for “legal services”. This

was indeed a false claim as Maharaj had never done any legal work for the

Close Corporation.

The amazing part is that Maharaj did not file his claims totalling R520 000

( R400 000 and R120 000) at either the First of Second Meeting of

Creditors.

……………………………………………………………………………………………..

Simi Maharaj

Simi Maharaj : The Liquidator, shares the same office premises with her

husband Raakesh Maharaj at Masonic Grove Chambers.

She was nominated for several of the smaller claims by alleged creditors.

Two such creditors that she was nominated by were her husband Raakesh

Maharaj for R120 000 and Mohammed Afzal Ebrahim for R900 000.

She did not present these 2 claims at either the First or Second Meeting of

Creditors, in fact she did not present any claims at all.

So why did she attend the First and Second Meeting of Creditors if she had

no claims to present?

…………………………………………………………………………………………….

Marco Accolla

Accolla’s Role : Accolla presented 2 claims at the First Meeting of

Creditors. One was for R5 million (he alleged that he lent the CC R5

million – Accolla was never in possession of R5 million ever in his life!)

The other claim was a salary claim for R2 440 000 which covered a

period of 45 months – for “services rendered, for management of daily

operations and strategic business expansion”

One invoice was for R1 000 000 (one million rand) for “negotiating 8

Leases Country wide, securing prime locations for stores, Entertaining

lamdlords to secure sites” (‘lamdlords’ – his spelling!)

This is in addition to him already collecting a monthly salary.

Accolla submitted a Member’s Resolution that he made himself for

himself – to state that he could charge for these services and escalate the

fee ‘at his sole discretion’. He signed this document himself.

No other person was aware of the alleged existence of this document – not

his partner, not the accountants.... no one. There was no loan account

created in the business to support his position that he was owed a salary

(over and above the one he was already collecting). The invoices were

never presented on a monthly basis to the accountants. The Resolution

popped up at the First Meeting of Creditors to support the claim for

R2 440 000. There is no doubt that he created these invoices the night

before the first meeting of creditors.

Accolla’s 2 claims were not accepted at the First Meeting of Creditors.

In his application to liquidate the CC, Accolla indicates that he is an

Unsecured Creditor as he is owed R5million. FALSE!

……………………………………………………………………………………………..

Mohammed Afzal Ebrahim

Mohammed Afzal Ebrahim : Friend of Accolla and client of Maharaj. He

is referred to as the “kingpin” of a Property Syndicate that operated with

the Sheriffs at Property Auctions. More interesting facts about him, his

current court case and his conviction later.

He is reflected as an Unsecured Creditor in the amount of R2 million.

Simi Maharaj also indicates to the Master that she received a nomination

from M A Ebrahim, that he is owed R900 000 by the CC. This Nomination

Form is not in the file at the Master’s Office.

What business MA Ebrahim, a property dealer, could possibly have done

with a fashion retailer was never explained.

His 2 claims totaling R2.9 million were never presented at the First or

Second Meeting of Creditors.

.....................................................................................

Michael Bradbury

Michael Bradbury : a panel beater at Kenley Panel Beaters situated at

18 Ayott Avenue, Umbilo, is a close friend of Accolla.

He submitted a claim for R25 000 for ‘Consultation Fees’ and he

nominated Simi Maharaj as the liquidator.

What a panel beater could possibly have consulted with a Fashion Retailer

about was never explained.

His claim was never presented at either the First or Second Meeting of

Creditors.

………………………………………………………………………………………..

The Main Creditor(R7 million Creditor)

The Main Creditor (R7 million Creditor) : Raakesh Maharaj filled in the

form to nominate Abbas Latib as the Liquidator for Mr NA (to protect

identity)

Maharaj states that Mr NA “advanced money” in the sum of R7 million

(seven million) to the CC.

The personal details of Mr NA that were inserted on the Nomination form

were correct, meaning his name, address and telephone number.

This R7 million claim was not presented at either the First or Second

Meeting of Creditors.

It is worthy to note that Mr NA was a client of Maharaj, and this

is how Maharaj was in possession of all Mr NA’s personal

information.

Mr NA informed the SAPS in his complaint that the signature on the

Nomination Form is not his and that he did not do any business with

the CC or its member.

At the time that the Nomination Form was signed, Mr NA did not even

know of Marco Accolla or the CC and it was therefore not even possible for

Accolla to have borrowed R7 million from Mr NA.

……………………………………………………………………………………………..

The Mother-in-Law

The Mother-in-Law : Simi Maharaj presented a Nomination Form to the

Master of the High Court that reflects that she was appointed on behalf of

Mrs LA (name has been abbreviated to protect identity), Mrs LA is the

mother-in-law of Mr NA (the main creditor for R7 million). The claim was

for R20 000 for “services rendered”. Mrs LA was also a client of Maharaj,

so he had her personal details.

Simi Maharaj did not present this claim at either the First or Second

Meeting of Creditors.

The personal information for Mother-in-law Mrs LA is correct, but Mrs LA

did not fill in this form, she did not sign it either.

Mrs LA has no knowledge of the close corporation or its member and

therefore could not have done any business with the CC.

……………………………………………………………………………………………..

The Partner

The Partner : upon hearing that the Liquidation had been granted by the

Master, the partner attempted to bring an urgent application in the High

Court to stop the Liquidation from proceeding.

The partner attended the First and Second Meeting of Creditors and

informed the Assistant Master that the claims presented to the Master were

false.

The Partner also lodged an official complaint with the Master about the

false liquidation.=========================================

ACCOLLA AND MAHARAJ CHARGED AND

APPEAR IN COURT!!

Accolla charged: 7 September 2015 First Appearance in Commercial Crime Court

Maharaj charged: 29 September 2015 First Appearance in Commercial Crime Court

Unsecured Creditors List A

False Claims Against Noella & Rosario cc

K MAHARAJ : Raakesh Maharaj filled in these 2 pages in his own handwriting

– List A “Unsecured Creditors”. He states that he was supplied with the

information by Marco Accolla. If Maharaj had only just met Accolla and only

filled in a few forms for Accolla to liquidate the CC, then how was Maharaj

owed R400 000 (no explanation) and R120 000 (for fees)? Maharaj could not

have been forced by Accolla to make false claims for his (Maharaj’s ) benefit!!

MARCO ACCOLLA submits that he is owed R5 million - FALSE

MA Ebrahim was not owed R2 million – FALSE

Krost Shelving were not owed R35 000 – FALSE

Staff Salaries – the staff were not owed any money - FALSE

FNB – was not owed R1million - FALSE

Old Mutual – was not owed R260 000.00 - FALSE

..........................................................

ABBAS, LATIB & COMPANY

This is MR NA’S Nomination Form for the FALSE CLAIM

OF R7 MILLION RANDS!!!

FORGED SIGNATURE ON FALSE CLAIM!

MARCO ACCOLLA’S FALSE R5million CLAIM

This claim was not submitted at either the First or Second

Meeting of Creditors. Marco Accolla did not lend the Close

Corporation R5million. FALSE CLAIM

Almenta Trust - Creditor Nominations

Nominations Presented by Simi Maharaj

t/a Almenta Trust to the Master of the High

Court

Simi Maharaj was nominated by :

1. Raakesh Maharaj – claim for R120 000 for “Legal Services”

2. Michael Bradbury – claim for R 25 000 for “Consultation Fees”

3. TNN Trading – claim for R20 000 for “Services rendered”

4. SEVERAL OTHER SMALLER CLAIMS

None of these claims were presented at the First or Second Meeting of

Creditors. Simi Maharaj, wife of Raakesh Maharaj, files a claim for her

husband when application was made to the Master to liquidate Noella &

Rosario CC. However, she does not submit this or ANY of the other claims

at the First or Second Meeting of Creditors.

.

MRS SIMI MAHARAJ..OF ALMENTA TRUST, WIFE OF RAAKESH

MAHARAJ, APPOINTED AS ONE OF THE LIQUIDATORS

Nomination 1 for Raakesh Maharaj

Raakesh Maharaj filled this in himself in his own handwriting. How could he

have charged for LEGAL SERVICES of R120 000 when he had NOT DONE

ANY WORK for the Close Corporation? He appointed his wife as the

Liquidator to collect this for him but she DID NOT put this claim in either at the

First or Second meeting of Creditors ...STRANGE BUT TRUE!

Nomination 2 for Michael Bradbury

NOTE : This claim was NOT submitted at the First or Second Meeting of

creditors. Bradbury is a PANEL BEATER who signed this claim form to state

he is owed R25000 for ‘CONSULTATION FEES’ . WHY would a fashion

retailer consult with a panel beater? Won’t have long to wait for the answer,

Bradbury can explain himself when he gives evidence in the Commercial Crime

Court….coming up soon! HE IS A FRIEND OF ACCOLLA’S!

Nomination 3 for MRS LA’s company

Simi Maharaj presented this nomination form to the Master. Mrs LA who

represents this company did not sign this form, she has no knowledge of Noella

& Rosario CC and did not do any business with them Simi Maharaj did not

present this claim at the First or Second meeting of Creditors.

STRANGE BUT TRUE!

Nomination 4 for Nadio Coppola

Nadio Coppola is a relative of Marco Accolla. This claim was not submitted

at the First of Second Meeting of Creditors

Nomination 5 for MA Ebrahim

SIMI MAHARAJ wrote to the Master stating that she had received 2 more nominations,

One was allegedly from Mohamed Afzal Ebrahim for R900 000. This

Nomination Form was not in the file at the Master’s office and was never

produced at either the first or second meeting of creditors.

Nomination 6 for GS Projects

GS Projects were not aware of this claim. It was not presented at the First of Second Meeting of Creditors. Marco Accolla initialled on this claim form.

Nomination 7 for Mark Lombaard

This claim was not submitted at the First or Second meeting of creditors.

FALSE CLAIM

Nomination 8 for Sathasivan Arungasamy (Mason)

An ELECTRICIAN whose company is MS Electrical

This claim was not submitted at the First or Second meeting of

Creditors. FALSE CLAIM

Nomination 9 for Clinton Pillay

Clinton Pillay signed this claim. It was not presented at the First or Second

Meeting of Creditors. FALSE CLAIM

Simi Maharaj signed this document and submitted

to The Master of the High Court

When she attended the first Meeting of Creditors, Simi Maharaj did not

present any of the above claims....WHY?

Abbas, Latib & Company

Creditor Nominations Forms

Nomination Form of MR NA

The Nomination Form was filled in by Raakesh Maharaj in his own

handwriting. Mr NA did not sign this document....

SOMEONE FORGED HIS SIGNATURE!

Mr N.A did not lend R7million to Noella & Rosario CC . He had no knowledge

of Marco Accolla or Noella & Rosario CC until more than a month after the

liquidation was registered.... BUT ...Mr N.A was a client of Maharaj and

Maharaj was in possession of his personal details that appear on the

Nomination Form.

Mr N.A lodged a complaint with the SAPS that his signature was forged and his

personal details fraudulently used, and based on this Marco Accolla and

Raakesh Maharaj were charged. This claim was NOT presented at the First or

Second meeting of Creditors

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nomination 2 for Marco Accolla

This document was filled in by Maharaj in his own handwriting, and Accolla

signed it. Maharaj wrote the word “CREDITOR” in and dated the document.

Marco Accolla was NOT owed R5million. This claim was rejected by the

Master of the High Court.

THIS IS A FALSE CLAIM

Second Meeting of Creditors

At the Second Meeting of Creditors, The Aggrieved Partner presented a

Memorandum to the Master of The High Court, setting out the Fraud, Forgery

and Perjury that had been committed in the Liquidation.

The Memorandum:

*..recorded that Criminal Charges had been laid by a Legitimate Creditor about

the fraudulent claims. The Alleged Creditor Mr N.A had also attested to an

Affidavit that he had been fraudulently presented in the liquidation and that his

signature had been forged.

*..recorded that a complaint had been lodged with the LAW SOCIETY against

Raakesh Maharaj.

*..recorded that a Formal Complaint had been lodged with the Master of the

High Court about the fraud committed in the Liquidation

*..recorded that the procedures that were followed in the liquidation process

were flawed as Creditors (even the fake ones) were not given notice of the First

and Second Meeting of Creditors, which is mandatory.

*..recorded that a proper estimate of the Assets and Liabilities of the CC was

not conducted, in particular that the Freehold Commercial Property valued at

over R5 million was not listed when application was made to liquidate.

*..called for the Liquidators to ascertain what steps they had taken to ascertain

the authenticity of the claims that were presented by them.

*..called for the Liquidators to explain why they had not conducted an

investigation into the removal of R1.8 million from the Business Account of the

CC by the member just prior to him filing for Voluntary Liquidation.

*..called for the Liquidators to explain why they had not supervised the removal

of the Assets from the trading stores of the CC, when the Liquidators closed

these stores. The liquidators permitted Accolla to remove the Assets and some

of them have disappeared. When the partner questioned Accolla about certain

assets that had not been returned, he slyly returned them. However, not all the

assets have been returned.

*..questioned the Liquidators why they did not conduct a viability study into the

CC, they simply closed down the stores that were generating an income.

*..called for a halting of the liquidation until the police investigation had been

conducted

*..called for a halt in the sale of the Assets of the CC, in particular the freehold

commercial building

*.. recorded the prejudice that was being suffered by The Partner and the loss of

jobs should the false liquidation proceed

*..recorded the prejudice to the leases of the existing trading stores should the

liquidation proceed

*..recorded the irreparable damage to the reputation of the trading name of Ooh

La La Boutique as a result of the fake liquidation

*..recorded that the Accountant for the CC had provided confirmation that the

business was viable and there was absolutely no reason to liquidate it.

.............................................................................................

Unfortunately, no one at the Master’s Office responded to this.

Neither did the Liquidators... one of which was Maharaj’s wife.

................................................................................................................

Setting-Aside of the Liquidation Accolla realised that he was not going to be able to proceed with the

liquidation as The Partner was raising objections to the process as it was

based on a fraud. There were also the criminal charges that had been laid

against him and his attorney.

He applied to the High Court to set-aside the liquidation. He stated that the

R7million loan was a “personal” loan and that it was settled.

This is the extract from Accolla’s affidavit to the High Court :

In his concluding paragraph, Accolla states that the sole reason for placing

the CC into liquidation is that the supplier of the goods had ceased

supplying the CC. This is untrue. Accolla had stolen all the CC’s funds and

he could not pay for the goods. The supplier had to issue summons and has

still not been paid, three and a half years later. With the R7million he

allegedly borrowed, he could have sourced goods from anywhere in the

world!

Devastating Consequences of the

False Liquidation

Gateway Lease Determined : Although the liquidation was Set-Aside on

18thMay 2015, the damage to what was an empire, built over a period of

over 35 years, was already done.

Within 3 months after a liquidation is registered, all leases are determined,

meaning automatically cancelled.

There were 3 stores remaining in the CC, one was the Gateway store. The

store belonged to The Partner, only the lease was in the name of the CC.

Accolla’s vindictiveness : Accolla had previously tried through his

attorney to have his Partner removed from the store simply because he was

vindictive and wanted to use this as a means to “force her hand” to sign

documents in respect of buying him out. He did not succeed then. This was

now his ideal opportunity to cause his partner irreparable harm by

removing her from the only trading store that she had. He had no regard for

the loss of jobs that this would cause.

Consent to Vacate : On 19th May 2015, the very day after the liquidation

was set-aside in the High Court and the CC was once again “in business”,

Marco Accolla was once again empowered to act for the CC. He signed a

Consent to Vacate with the attorneys representing Gateway, Thorpe &

Hands. As a member of the CC, Accolla was able to do this even though he,

Thorpe & Hands and the landlord Old Mutual Properties were fully aware

that the actual tenant was Ooh La La and not the CC, and had been the

tenant for over 15 years. The lease was for another 18 months more, ending

in October 2016 and The Partner’s R395 000 was held as security for the lease.

Thorpe & Hands , the attorneys representing Gateway, sent an Eviction

Notice to The Partner, the founder of Ooh La La Boutique. Ooh La La had

traded at Gateway for over 15 years, from the very first day the centre

opened. Thorpe & Hands was the same firm of Attorneys who sent a “spy”

to a meeting at the Westville Country Club that was intended for Pavilion

tenants only. The “spy” used recording devices at what was a private

meeting hosted by Ooh La La Boutique, and the “spy” was caught. A

complaint was lodged with the Law Society and Thorpe & Hands was found

guilty of misconduct and fined R10 000. It appears that Thorpe & Hands

saw this as a “pay back” opportunity.

High Court : Ooh La La opposed the eviction but sadly the truth did not

win the day. The judge ruled that as Accolla was a member of the Close

Corporation, he was empowered to sign the Consent to Vacate as the lease

was in the name of the CC. The standpoint from the attorneys for Gateway

was that the lease had determined due to the liquidation (even though it

was a false liquidation and even though the liquidation was set aside) and

there was at that moment in time no valid lease. Ooh La La had not

defaulted in any way, the rent was up-to-date, and this was a very popular

store that added value to the centre. The entire matter cannot be explained

in this forum but Ooh La La had to pay legal costs which amounted to close

to R250 000 for opposing the eviction. The judge did however mention that

the partner had a damages action against Accolla.

Ooh La La had to cease trading immediately, strip the shopfitting that had

cost R1million, and vacate. Most of the all-female staff lost their jobs, most

of them were sole-supporters of their families. This also affected Ooh La La

Head Office staff as without a store, the office staff had no work, and more

than 30 women lost their means of livelihood.

An empire was destroyed due to the FAKE LIQUIDATION.

If it were not for this fake liquidation, Ooh La La would still be

trading. The owner would have been able to sell the business as a

going concern and retire with this money after working at the

business for 35 years.

A CIVIL CLAIM against Accolla and Maharaj is presently being

prepared. All creditors who presented fraudulent claims will be

joined in as it was due to their collective misrepresentation that

the Application for Voluntary Liquidation was granted by the

CIPC and liquidators being appointed by the Master, which

culminated in the lease being cancelled.

.....................................................................................................

Commercial Crime Case No 500/11/2014

Criminal Charges : Another consequence of the fake liquidation is the

criminal case in the Specialised Commercial Crime Court. Accolla and

Raakesh Maharaj were charged in this matter.

All Creditors : All claims submitted to the CIPC and the Master will be

investigated and all persons who submitted these claims will be called upon

to explain. All supporting documentation will have to be produced to

validate their claims. Invoices, statements, VAT Returns, Accountant /

Auditor reports etc., will have to be produced should the creditor state his

claim was a genuine claim.

Accolla will have to explain his R5million claim : he claims that he is

owed R5 million as this was a “loan” to the CC. Accolla never did possess

R5 million. There is absolutely no record of this R5 million being loaned to

the business. This loan is not reflected in the Financials from inception to

date.

Accolla will have to explain his claim for R2 440 000 which he states is

owed in respect of salary. This claim was not presented to the Master when

application to appoint Liquidators was made. The claim popped up at the

First Meeting of Creditors. Accolla can explain why he did not pay himself

this salary on a monthly basis as the business did have the funds to pay

him. There is also no loan account in the financials that reflect that he is

owed R2 440 000.00

He will be given the opportunity to explain at the trial.

......................................................................................................

Raakesh Maharaj will have to explain his R400 000 and R120 000

claims.At the First and Second Meeting of Creditors, Raakesh Maharaj was

present, yet his claims did not make an appearance! His claims were not

tendered. He will have to explain. His wife, who he had nominated to

present his claim, did not do this even though she was present.

He will be given the opportunity during the trial to explain.

....................................................................................................

R7 million Claim, the major creditor : at the First and Second Meeting of

Creditors, Asif Latib of Abbas Latib & Co did not present this claim. He was

appointed to do so, so does this mean he has failed to perform his

obligation in terms of his nomination?

At neither the first nor second meeting of Creditors did Asif Latib inform

the Master that he was alerted to the fraud and forgery within a

month of the liquidation being granted by the High Court. He was

absolutely silent on this. He has to explain his silence.

He will be given the opportunity during the trial to do so.

.....................................................................................................

Simi Maharaj : she did not present a single claim at either the First or

Second Meeting of Creditors. In particular, she did not present the claim for

R900 000 for the “kingpin” of the property syndicate Mr Mohamed Afzal

Ebrahim that she claimed she received a nomination for and for the

R120 000 for Raakesh Maharaj (her husband’s one). She did not explain to

the Master at these meetings why she was not presenting any of the claims

she was nominated for.

She will be given the opportunity during the trial to do so.

..................................................................................................

What happened next....

In August 2015, after he set-aside the liquidation and the CC was “back in

business”, Accolla removed the last of the cash reserves from the CC’s

account. He instructed the bank to transfer this R400 000 to Raakesh

Maharaj’s Trust Account.

The Partner was overseas when this occurred. When The Partner’s attorney

requested an explanation for the removal of this money, the response from

Accolla’s attorney Maharaj was the letter that appears below. Maharaj will

be required to explain his letter in which he states that the R400 000 was

used to “pay Creditors, primarily rent for certain stores”. It has emerged

from Accolla speaking under oath at the Interrogation, that Maharaj did not

pay the rentals for the stores and that the money went to him for “legal

expenses” associated with the (false) liquidation.

Both Maharaj and Accolla will be given an opportunity during the trial to

explain this. The rentals are still outstanding. Accolla did not pay the rental

at Chatsworth Centre and The Galleria Shopping Centre.

Prejudice : Because Accolla did not pay the rentals the Landlords have

barred the brand from renting premises at the shopping malls. The Partner

has had to close the business. An empire that thrived for over 35 years was

destroyed and more than 30 women who were the sole breadwinners for

their families lost their jobs. More than two and a half years later, many of

these women have still not found jobs.

:

Maharaj does not explain how exactly the R400 000 was spent, which

creditors and which rentals. This is a LIE as it turns out...

Maharaj states that there were creditors to be paid. Strange.... at the First

and Second Meeting of Creditors, the Liquidators did not present creditors

for rent, or any other legitimate creditors.

Based on Maharaj’s admission that the CC was insolvent – that there were

Creditors, the CC owed R500 000 and was not trading, The Partner

brought an Application to Liquidate the CC.

The Partner was successful in Liquidating Accolla’s CC .

The Partner is owed over R12 million.

The Assets of the CC are insufficient to pay The Partner, so The Partner has

applied for a Preservation Order, to attach Accolla’s Bank Account and

Properties purchased by Accolla using the stolen money (Accolla had

removed funds from the CC that were due to the Creditors) , in particular

The Partner who is the Major Creditor.

Accolla has since admitted under oath at an interrogation that the

R400 000 was taken by Maharaj for “legal fees” in respect of the

liquidation. He said that he has not seen the account, he merely assumed

that is was correct.

It will be interesting to watch this matter unravel in the Commercial Crime

Court

.....................................................................................................

COMPLAINT TO THE LAW SOCIETY

The Partner lodged a complaint with the LAW SOCIETY against Raakesh

Maharaj. In is response, Maharaj states that he was merely the “scribe”,

that he filled in the information into the forms on the instructions of

Accolla. He states that he gave the unsigned forms to Accolla.

This is a lie as Accolla had no knowledge of Mr NA or his mother-in-law,

Maharaj had their personal details as they were his clients.

Mr NA and his mother-in-law were clients of Maharaj before Accolla came

along. If Accolla as a new client, informed Maharaj that his existing client

lent him R7million that he was unable to repay and was therefore wanting

to liquidate the CC, it would be Maharaj’s professional and ethical

responsibility to his existing client to request that Accolla provides the

evidence of the alleged loan. Maharaj ought to have requested the loan

agreement and checked if his existing client’s loan was secured. Maharaj’s

neglect of this action is suspicious.

This is another lie as Maharaj himself put in two claims totalling R520 000.

Is Maharaj trying to say that Accolla told him to “scribe” that as well.... and

being the good attorney that he is, he followed his client’s instructions and

filled in two (false) claims for himself.

Filing false claims for himself is definitely wrongdoing.

Accolla submits a Confirmatory Affidavit to the Law Society in support of

Maharaj. He confirms that Maharaj was only the “scribe”..that he provided

all the information for Maharaj to fill onto the forms.

How can it be “vindictive and frivolous” if you lodge a complaint that your

personal details were used in a false claim for R7million and that your

signature was forged? Besides this being wrong and harmful to him as Mr

NA will come under scrutiny for being in possession of R7million cash that

was being lent out, Mr NA was under obligation to report this to the Master

and the Liquidators.

Mr NA has submitted an affidavit to the SAPS that he did not know Accolla

at all, had no communication with him at all and never lent him R7million.

This is what actually happened : When Mr NA was sent a photo of the

Nomination Form which reflected that a R7million claim was made in his

name, he contacted the liquidator Asif Latib. He questioned Latib about

why he and his mother-in-law were being used in this matter that they

knew absolutely nothing about.

A short while later Mr NA received a call from Maharaj. Maharaj assured

him that he will sort everything out. The next day Maharaj took Accolla to

meet Mr NA. They met for the first time 5 weeks after the liquidation was

registered. Maharaj and Accolla placated Mr NA and said that if his claim is

not submitted at the First meeting of Creditors, then it will just go away. To

further support their lie, Maharaj induced Mr NA to come to his office and

sign a document to state that the R7million loan had “been repaid”. Mr NA,

bewildered by this entire matter, signed the document and Accolla collected

it from Maharaj the same day. Mr NA did not receive a copy.

When Mr NA’s new attorney requested a copy of this document, Maharaj

responds with :

Maharaj denies any involvement in the signing of the document. Mr NA

certainly was not going to submit a false claim to the Master. Mr NA was

also not going to apply to the High Court to set-aside the liquidation. Why

should he? There was no applicant creditor. It was a “Voluntary

Liquidation” by creditors. This letter is nothing more than MUMBO-

JUMBO!

What justification can Accolla have for using Mr NA’s name? His name was

used “spuriously and vexatiously”!

Maharaj and Accolla will certainly be afforded the opportunity to explain

why Mr NA’s name was used........

================================================

INTERROGATION BY THE LIQUIDATORS

ON 9th MARCH 2017

ACCOLLA TOOK THE OATH BEFORE PROCEEDINGS

COMMENCED

The Money : At the Interrogation at the Master’s office, Accolla admitted

that he removed the R1.8 million from the bank account of the CC and

transferred these funds to his personal account. He also admitted that he

requested FNB to transfer R400 000 to Maharaj’s trust account.

In the new liquidation, Accolla submitted a claim for salary for R1 440 000 not paid

out to him. This is a reduced claim, he removed an invoice for R1million that he

previously claimed was for “negotiating leases for the CC”. When questioned, Accolla

admitted that he did not submit the invoices for his alleged salary to the CC every

month. He also admitted that he did not submit his salary invoices to the accountant

every month so the accountant was not aware of this. He also admitted that the

financials that he signed off every year do not reflect this R1 440 00.00 as being due

to him.

R18 MILLION CASH : Accolla also admitted that over a five year period he did

not deposit about R18million in cash that was some of the turnover belonging to the

CC, into the CC’s bank account and that he never informed his accountant about this

cash. He admitted that as he did not declare this turnover, he did not pay SARS the

VAT that he had collected. Accolla admitted that the financials that he had signed

every year were therefore false.

Ignorance : When questioned about his educational qualifications, Accolla stated

that had a Bcompt degree from Unisa and that he had a Masters in Accounting.

Accolla therefore cannot plead ignorance about how the accounting in a business is

to be conducted.

---------------------------------------------------------

INTERESTING FACTS : Attorney Raakesh Maharaj used the same modus

operandi to liquidate and sequestrate another one of his clients, the “kingpin of a

property syndicate”..the same one mentioned above – Mohamed Afzal Ebrahim.

Maharaj put in 2 claims (for himself and his company Angelfish Investments) in MA

Ebrahim’s sequestration (for R1.1million and R56 000.00) but he did not finally

submit these to the liquidators!

In the above liquidation and sequestration, Agreements were fabricated and back-

dated, staff were made to sign on these false agreements, fake claims on nomination

forms... SIGNATURES FORGED...more soon on this!