Canara Bank hires Guarantee based lawyers

"BEFORE INFORMATION COMMISSIONER, OLD JNU CAMPUS, NEW DELHI–67.

                    File No CIC/VS/A/2012/000195

                    Date of Hearing 30-4-2013

Kapil Dev Aggarwal H No 1366, Sector 40-B, Chandigarh           Appellant

Versus

1.     Sh Subodh Kumar PIO, Divisional manager, Canara bank, Circle office, plot No 1, Sector 34, Chandigarh.

2.     Sh Mohinderpal, DGM (Acting),  Canara bank, Circle office, plot No 1, Sector 34, Chandigarh                        Respondents

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF APPELLANT.

It is a matter of records that Sh Arun Palli is not conversant with commercial laws and has never done any case under Securitization Act or DRT Act.

It is a matter of knowledge provable from information in possession of Canara bank that Sh Arun Palli has never been engaged by Canara bank in any other case except subject matter or before any other Judge of High Court except in subject matter.

It is matter of common knowledge that Arun Palli took this matter by giving Guarantee of a favorable order. Canara bank encouraged corruption by engaging Arun Palli solely on the basis of his guaranteed order.

Canara bank can prove that it is not encouraging corruption or indulging in money laundering by providing relevant information. If they oppose production of records, there can only be one inference which will be against the interests of Canara Bank.

K D Aggarwal, Convener IAC Chandigarh

Date 20-4-2013"

Copy of speed post dated 20-4-2013 is as under;-

For adverse inference to be drawn, CIC was only required to record the Objection raised by Canara bank, which it CIC did. As expected Canara Bank too objection that the notings on the file as to why Particularly Arun Palli was engaged before Surya Kant and what assurance Arun Palli had given and what is written on file as to the reasons of engagement before Justice Surya Kant are highly secret. and so is the correspondence with Lawyer regarding the reasons for dramatic change of advocate are extremely confidential. What can be confidential about reasons for engaging a particular lawyer having no knowledge or experience in Securitization matters unless the reasons are guarantee, assurance, relations or settlement based. 

700 Advocates have recently signed a statement sent to all Judges wherein it is stated:

"We feel that Orchids’ case was hushed up despite there being enough material on record requiring a CBI probe. Only Justice Mahender Pal was transferred. We feel that some more big sharks (judges and advocates) were also involved."

Arun Palli was Lawyer for orchids in above case. Justice Mohinder Pal, Judge, Punjab and Haryana High Court was transferred for taking money to decide in his favor the Orchid Case. Sh Arun Palli was specifically named in above complaint given to Chief Justice signed by over 700 advocates of Punjab and Haryana High Court.

Click here for Canara bank writes off 1460 Crores of Public Money in one year. In 2012-13 i.e. Public Debts of rich and influential. Rs 100 crores can give your city 24 water and electricity.

Objection taken by Canara Bank recorded by CIC;

 

To maintain dignity of Courts - Transfer all local Judges.

KD Aggarwal