traffic analytics

Justice is where Judges follow Law-KD Aggarwal. Powered by Blogger.

If Judgments were based on law, every lawyer will get same fees!-KD Aggarwal

Facts and Statute are Not Relevant. They are invented / concealed / amended by corrupt Judges - KD Aggarwal.

Let us make India Corruption free

The matter and inference drawn are based on actual personal experiences of Author. They are meant to serve as beacon to those who may find themselves in similar situations to save themselves from clutches of unscrupulous persons. They are also meant to serve as an eye opener to those men who are sitting at Helm of Affairs for improvement of judicial system and corruption free India, so that never again one says; "the law court is not a cathedral (what they used to be) but a casino where so much depends on the throw of the dice (and money). K R Narayanan http://www.krnarayanan.in/html/speeches/others/jan28_00.htm

Transparency improves Accountability

Every Judge is Public Servant and thus accountable for his acts. Transparency of Complaints against Judges and instant stringent action for perjury and violation of their oath will improve Dignity of Courts and Justice delivery.

Monday, December 1, 2014

corrupt are united.


Following is part of public record comprised in CA 657/2011, CA 580/2011.

Order of Judge Surya Kant initiating Contempt passed in CA 657 of 2011 and CA 580 of 2011 along with copies of Applications is as under;

"Since I am inclined to make a reference to initiate Criminal Contempt of Court Proceedings against Mr KD Aggarwal, Advocate, let this application be placed before Hon’ble the Chief Justice for appropriate orders.

The (DP Ojha) Official Liquidator has handed over a sealed envelope which shall also be appended alongwith the reference to be made separately.

List on 13.1.2012 
Signed Surya Kant Judge Date’ 09-12-2011"

Note; As per record, the file was received directly from Surya Kant  court on 9-1-2012 which establishes that above order was ante dated. Short hand diary of PA (of 9-12-2011) will reveal that order passed on 09-12-2011 was “ List before other bench after obtaining orders from Hon’ble the Chief Justice. This order was passed on my company application for listing the matter before other bench. The application is as under;

In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana, Chandigarh
Company Application 657 of 2011 
In Company Application 580 of 2011

In the matter of;

Embezzlement of funds by DP Ojha, Official Liquidator, Punjab & Haryana High Court.

Application u/r 9 of company Court Rules 1959 to point out Orders of Hon’ble the chief Justice.
 
Respectfully Showeth;

1.     That matter pertains to Embezzlement of funds by D P Ojha Official Liquidator, high Court. It is information given to Hon’ble High Court on administrative side, which is based on documents received under RTI. This matter was earlier dealt with on Administrative side by senior company Judge, who then ordered that this matter to be listed on judicial side.  Error in listing occurred as Computer could not read the name of Judge who passed earlier Order. I am (as everyone else) is in dark as to why an administrative matter is listed on Judicial side which is only known to the Hon’ble Judge who passed the said Order. The matter was brought to the notice of Registrar (Judicial) to rectify computer error and matter was thereafter placed before Hon’ble chief Justice who was pleased to pass the following Order;-

“If any change is required, matter may be mentioned before the Judge
Sd/ Chief Justice”

Hence the present application, for listing the matter before appropriate Bench.

2.     The instant matter pertains to embezzlement of funds worth more than Rs 1.00 Crores from properties vested in High Court u/s 456(2) of Companies Act. On 21.10.11, SH D P Ojha falsely stated in court, that my information is because on 3.2.11 he declined to examine my fee Bill sanctioned by H S Bawa ex-official Liquidator. Company petition and appeal filed by D P Ojha have already been dismissed. First information against illegal payment to Industrial security being made by D P Ojha against the nonexistent persons was by my letter Dt 20-11-2010 three months before his order of 3.2.2011 followed by letter Dt 7-1-2011 again one month before 3-2-2011. His order is being contrary to Orders of the then Chief Justice are also malafide as I had informed his administrative head that D P ojha is making payment on for nonexistent persons.

3.     Justice Justice Surya Kant had inter alia stated on 21.10.2011 that He knows everything about me. Let it be clarified that no one knows anything about me except what I have told him/her. Rest is all hearsay. I do not advertise the truth. To quote Winston Churchill ; “A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.” I am a victim of corruption, nepotism and favoritism. Like any other honest person I dislike these things. I can rebut each and everything which Justice Surya Kant may have heard about me that puts me in any negative light. (which will require mutual discussion – not while sitting on constitutional chair discussing matters not judicially before court). No one in the bar or staff knew about my letter Dt 4.6.2011. It is not possible to argue any case if there is mutual distrust.  In view of incident of 21.10.2011, and to avoid repetition of the same, it is also appropriate that matter be listed before another Bench.

It is therefore prayed that matter be ordered to be listed before appropriate bench. This mention is being made as per the order of Hon’ble the chief Justice dated 17.11.2011. Original Order is already on record of this case.

Chandigarh                                                 K D Aggarwal
Date; December 06, 2011                                     Applicant

In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh

Company Application 657/2011
In Company Application 580/2011

In the matter of;

Embezzlement of funds by DP Ojha, Official Liquidator, Punjab & Haryana High Court.


Affidavit of K D Aggarwal S/O R K Aggarwal R/O 1366, sector 40-, Chandigarh

I, Solemnly affirm and declare;-

1.     That matter pertains to Embezzlement of funds by D P Ojha Official Liquidator, high Court. It is information given to Hon’ble High Court on administrative side, which is based on documents received under RTI. This matter was earlier dealt with on Administrative side by senior company Judge, who ordered this matter to be listed on judicial side.  Error in listing occurred as Computer could not read the name of Judge who passed earlier Order. I am (as everyone else) is in dark as to why an administrative matter is listed on Judicial side which is only known to the Hon’ble Judge who passed the said Order. The matter was brought to the notice of Registrar (Judicial) to rectify computer error and matter was thereafter placed before Hon’ble chief Justice who was pleased to pass the following Order;-

“If any change is required, matter may be mentioned before the Judge
Sd/ Chief Justice”

Hence the present application, for listing the matter before appropriate Bench.

2.     The instant matter pertains to embezzlement of funds worth more than Rs 1.00 Crores from properties vested in High Court u/s 456(2) of Companies Act. On 21.10.11, SH D P Ojha falsely stated in court, that my information is because on 3.2.11 he declined to examine my fee Bill sanctioned by H S Bawa ex-official Liquidator. Company petition and appeal filed by D P Ojha have already been dismissed. First information against illegal payment to Industrial security being made by D P Ojha against the nonexistent persons was by my letter Dt 20-11-2010 three months before his order of 3.2.2011 followed by letter Dt 7-1-2011 again one month before 3-2-2011. His order is being contrary to Orders of the then Chief Justice are also malafide as I had informed his administrative head that D P ojha is making payment on for nonexistent persons.

3.     Justice Justice Surya Kant had inter alia stated on 21.10.2011 that He knows everything about me. Let it be clarified that no one knows anything about me except what I have told him/her. Rest is all hearsay. I do not advertise the truth. To quote Winston Churchill ; “A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.” I am a victim of corruption, nepotism and favoritism. Like any other honest person I dislike these things. I can rebut each and everything which Justice Surya Kant may have heard about me that puts me in any negative light. (which will require mutual discussion – not while sitting on constitutional chair discussing matters not judicially before court). No one in the bar or staff knew about my letter Dt 4.6.2011. It is not possible to argue any case if there is mutual distrust.  In view of incident of 21.10.2011, and to avoid repetition of the same, it is also appropriate that matter be listed before another Bench.
Chandigarh
Dated 06.12.2011                                                        Deponent
Verification.
Verified that contents of above affidavit are true and correct to m knowledge. No part is false and noting material is concealed.
Chandigarh
Dated 06.12.2011                                                        Deponent

In High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh
Company Application 580/2011 
To,  Date      September 23rd, 2011
Hon’ble Company Judge,
Punjab and Haryana High Court,
Chandigarh.


Sub;  Embezzlement of funds of about Rs 1.00 Crores from properties vested in High Court u/s 456(2) of companies Act 1956.

Dear Sir,

With intent to cause loss to secured creditors and with intent to gain undue financial advantage to themselves, Sh D P Ojha, Sh J S Kahaan, MD Guardian Security & Industrial security and fire services Bombay P Ltd  and Sh M L Sharma MCA lobbyist, and Sh B K L Srivasatava ex Official Liquidator have entered into a criminal conspiracy to cheat and commit fraud with public money / public funds by raising a false and fraudulent claim in the matter of security guards bill raised by Industrial security fire services Bombay Ltd. The relevant details are as under;-

A.      Security agency has not made any payment to security guards;

1.     That in affidavit Dt 11.8.2010 filed with Official Liquidator by Industrial security and fire services (Bombay) pvt Ltd, in PNFC, it is stated that they have made entire payment from September 2005 to May 2009 (approx Rs 80,00,000/-) to their security guards. In addition they have ‘paid’ several more lacs in the cases of Arihant Cotsyn, hallmark healthcare, Mangla Cotex, Organic Chemoils, AVI shoes, la Medica, Punwire, Indo gem Laminations, Curefast remedies, Shiv Durga Alloys, etc. apart from several other companies vested in other high courts where it is empanelled. Their share capital is only Rs 50,000/-. They don’t have the wherewithal to pay Crores let alone Rs 80,00,000/- in PNFC to security guards. Their bank accounts do not show any such receipt of crores during 9/05 to 12/09. Such payment is also not reflected in their books of accounts. There is no question of their making any payment to security guards. At the time of inspection by PSIDC if at all permitted by OL, they have advance information from OL and their henchman collects daily wagers from labor chowk for a day to make up the numbers. During surprise inspection, staff found is 95% less vis a vis as claimed by Industrial Security. Copy of surprise inspection report got done by PSIDC is enclosed. As per this report there were only 5 employees as against 143 being claimed in the case of PNFC. Thus admittedly and as per evidence Industrial security is embezzling funds to the tune of 95% of claimed amount i. e (Rs 95 Lacs in case of one company alone) of their false and fraudulent claim.  They do not have cash in hand to incur the expenses being claimed from high courts.

B       Blank Bank account submitted

2a.    False a/cs have been opened in Goa in name of employyes alleged to be based in Punjab. It is to facilitate theft of funds. Vide order Dt 7/8/2009 passed in CA 1-2/2009 in CP 254 of 1999, it was ordered that security agencies hence forth shall deposit salary of security guards in their bank accounts. However vide affidavit Dt 11.8.2010 by Industrial security, it has stated on oath that no salary has been paid to security guards through bank accounts after august 2009. This amounts to refusal to accept the order of High Court. Bank accounts are blank. The name of security guards on spot do not tally with names given in bank accounts.

2b     last Lump sum payment deposited by them on receipt of Rs 11,00,000 were withdrawn back by them on the basis of advance cheques they had collected from guards. Copy of their bank statements are on record. They have obviously filed false affidavits to derive undue gain to themselves and cause undue loss to secured creditors. OL should ask security agency to refund entire amount received by them till date along with up to date interest. Copy of their indemnity bond is on record.

C.      Security agencies working on annual return of 1% ex-facie False.

3.     That in the matter of PNFC, the security agency is claiming payment since 2005. Industrial Security and fire services (Bombay) has submitted blank statement of bank a/c of employees which indicate that no payment has been made to employees through bank accounts. The contention of security agency that it is taking only 1% pa return(7% over 7 year period means 1% annual return) is impossible as banks give assured return of approx 8% pa. With intent to gain advantage to themselves and cause loss to public exchequer, Security agency has refused to accept conditions laid down by the Court in its order Dt 7.8 2009 and violated them with impunity.

D.      Commission based allocation of work;

4.     That according to J S Kahaan, Managing Director of Guardian Industrial and Investigation security services, work for the appointment of security agency work is not allocated seriatim by High Court but telephonic bids are invited by Official Liquidator and only that security agency is appointed which offers highest commission to OL. Normal rate of commission varies from 40-60% depending on number of guards and period for which they will continue, which is paid at the time of release of money. Hence in a case of criminal conspiracy and intent to gain financial advantage to themselves no attempt has been made to sell assets for last more than a decade even though taking out advertisement of sale would take only ten minutes.
E.      Theft of assets;

5.     It is an admitted fact that no inventory was prepared either by BKL Srivasatava or by present OL or by security agency and none was allowed to be prepared by secured creditors or industrial security agency/ Guardian Industrial Investigation and security services Pvt Ltd. Inventory is generally not prepared to facilitate theft by security agencies. I cannot disclose information which had come to my possession when I was counsel for Guardian Industrial Investigation and security services Pvt Ltd. as to clandestine sale of assets by Industrial security & fire services Pvt Ltd.

F.      Premises given on rent by security agency.

6.     When asked as to how security agency manages to pay even 5% of the staff which it claims to have employed by them, Sh J S Kahaan informed that in most of the cases, premises are given out on rent without informing the High Court and salaries etc are paid from said receipts out of unauthorized rental use of premises.


For information and necessary action.


CA KD Aggarwal
Advocate