Wednesday, October 19, 2005

 

779 SIKH INTERVENTION IN THE CHAVALI SUPREME COURT OF CANADA APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL NO:31006

Tuesday, October 18, 2005

779 SIKH INTERVENTION IN THE CHAVALI SUPREME COURT OF CANADA APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL NO:31006

HAROLD C FUNK, THE VOICE OF THE VOICELESS OCTOBER 21-23,2005
205 GLADSTONE AVE APT 46 OUT ON MONDAY-FRIDAY TEL(613) 235-0617
OTTAWA,COMMENT:http://thevoiceless;blogspot.com FAX(613)235-5573
ONTARIO K2P OY5 http://www.thebeatonthestreet.ottawa.on.ca
DEAR HEAD OF NATION http://poliblog.blogspot.com
CHAVALI APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL TO THE SUPREME COURT
OF CANADA 31006 TALK: PART II:
I PROMISED TO KEEP YOU INFORMED ABOUT THIS CASE
WHERE THE CHAVALIS HAVE NOT BEEN ALLOWED A TRIAL
BY THE JUDICIAL AUTHORITIES IN CANADA
FOR 16 YEARS
AFTER THEY BROUGHT ACTION AGAINST JUDICIAL AUTHORITIES
FOR DEFRAUDING THEM OF $57 MILLION DOLLARS
OF THEIR OTTAWA PROPERTY AND LIVELY HOOD
AND STOLE THEIR HOUSEHOLD'FURNITURE
AND BUSINESS RECORDS.

THE SIKH SOCIAL AND EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY OF TORONTO
HAS FILED A MOTION TO INTERVENE IN THE CASE.
THIS ORGANIZATION REPRESENTS 60,000 SIKHS AND
RECIEVED TELEPHONE CALLS FROM VARIOUS DIFFERENT IMMIGRATION
AND CANADIAN CITIZENS GROUPS THAT INCLUDES
SEVERAL HUNDRED THOUSAND CANADIANS
THAT ARE OUTRAGED
AT THE INJUSTICE DONE TO THE CHAVALI FAMILY.
THE CHAVALI CASE HAS COME BEFORE THE PUBLIC
IN THE PAPERS,
THE VOICELESS, VOICE, INDIA ABROAD AND
BEEN BROADCAST OVER THE UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO RADIO
CUIT (89.5 F.M.).
THE CHAVALIES ARE IMMIGRANTS FROM INDIA
AND THE CASE REVOLVES AROUND RACIAL PREDJUDICE
OF THE JUDICIAL AUTHORITIES IN CANADA
TOWARDS PEOPLE FROM INDIA, BLACK PEOPLE, CHINESE PEOPLE,
CANADIAN INDIANS AND ANYONE OF COLOR
SINCE CONFEDERATION IN 1867 WHEN CANADA WAS
PART OF THE BRITISH SLAVE EMPIRE.
CANADIANS WERE SLAVES OF BRITAIN THAT RULED CANADA ON A MASTER
AND SLAVE BASIS AS THEY CONTINUE TO DO
USING THE QUEEN OF ENGLAND AS A FRONT PERSON.
THE JUDICIAL SLAVE JUDICIAL SYSTEM OF BRITAIN/CANADA
SHOULD BE ABOLISHED AS A TYRANNICAL SYSTEM
CORRUPT TO THE CORE AS PROVED BY THIS CASE.
THE INDIAN NATIONS OF CANADA HAD CANADA STOLEN
FROM UNDER THEM BY THE FRENCH AND ENGLISH
AND CATHOLIC CHURCH WITH THE GUN AND HAVE SUFFERED INJUSTICE
SINCE 1867 UNDER AN APARTHIED SYSTEM
USED ALSO IN SOUTH AFRICA WHO FINALLY LAST WEEK
ABOLISHED THE LAST OF THE BRITISH SLAVE LEGISLATION THAT
SET UP APARTHIED.
I SET OUT THE SIKH APPLICATION AND THE
CHAVALIES AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF THE APPLICATION IN LETTER NO:779.
NONE OF THE RESPONDENTS HAVE OBJECTED TO THIS INTERVENTION.
I WISH TO THANK THE SIKH COMMUNITY FOR INTERVENING
ON BEHALF OF ALL CANADIANS WHO MAY HAVE A DIFFERENT COLOR THAN
THE WHITE JUDICIARY.
I LOOK FORWARD TO ALL CANADIANS LEARNING TO BE COLOR BLIND.
PEACE

HAROLD C FUNK TO: HEADS-OF NATIONS. LETTER NO:779 PASS IT ON.

S.C.C. No. 31006

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA (ON APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL FROM THE SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE and COURT OF APPEAL, FOR THE PROVINCE OF ONTARIO)

BETWEEN:

REDDY RAJAGOPAL CHAVALI, REDDY KRISHNAVENI CHAVALI,

REDDY VENKATA SU BBARAMI CHAVALI, SADANA CORPORATION LTD., VAHINI HOLDINGS LTD., MERU HOLDINGS LTD., 715048 ONTARIO LTD.,715040 ONTARIO LTD., KSHAMA CORPORATION, LYON LAURIER DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, NIKOLAUS WOLF and LYON LAURIER PLACE DEVELOPMENT LTD.

Applicants

- and -

THE LAW SOCIETY OF UPPER CANADA and LAWYER'S PROFESSIONAL INDEMNITY COMPANY, NELLIGAN/POWER, GEORGE GATY, ROYAL TRUST CORPORATION OF CANADA, PEAT MARWICK THORNE INC., SAMUEL TALBERT and COLLETTE TALBERT

Respondents

NOTICE OF MOTION

INTERVENTION ON APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL (PURSUANT TO RULES IS AND 24(5)OF THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA )

TAKE NOTICE that an application is hereby made on behalf of The Sikh Social and Educational Society of Toronto and many other Communities in writing for an Order extending time for the Intervention on Application for Leave to Appeal, pursuant to section 40 of the Supreme Court Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. S-26, as amended and section 25 of the Rules of the Supreme Court, ,from the judgment of the Ontario Superior Court ofJustice (Nordheimer, J.), file number 02-CV- 240696 CMI, made on the 18"' day of April

2005; and the judgment of the Court of Appeal for Ontario (Finlayson, Abella, and

Austin, JJ.A), file number C29428, made on the 16`x' day of December 1998, pursuant to

which the Applicants were denied leave to continue with the proceedings to which the

Applicants were parties, and for an order granting leave to appeal or such further or other

order that the Court may deem appropriate.

TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that the Intervener will apply for an extension of

time for intervention on Application for Leave to Appeal referred to above cited.

AND TAKE NOTICE that in support of the application will be read the

Affidavit of HARDEV SINGH, the Intervener, representing over 60,000 Sikh community

members, sworn on September 19, 2005

This case raises an issue of (1) National or Public importance to warrant leave.

(2) the discriminatory conduct of the Law Society of Upper Canada, Lawyers'

Professional Indemnity Company and the Ex-Attorney General of Ontario/Agents in

violation of their Statutory duties; (3) the proper interpretation and application of section

140 of the Courts ofJustice Act[CJA] of Ontario, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.43, as amended, and

(4) whether section 140CJA infringed sections 7 and 15 of the Charter and is not justified

as reasonable limit pursuant to section 1 of the Charter.

Dated at Toronto, Ontario

this 19`s day of September 2005

HARDEV SINGH

The Sikh Social and Educational Society 66 Songbird Drive,

Markham, Ontario L3S 3T9, Canada Tel. No. (416) 740-7373 Fax No: (416) 740-7373

3 ORIGINAL TO: THE REGISTRAR, Supreme Court of Canada 301 Wellington StreetOttawa, Ontario KIA OJ1

AND TO: Nelligan O'Brien Payne LLP Banisters & Solicitors 1900-66 Slater Street, Ottawa, Ontario K1P 5H1 Allan R O'BrienTel:(613)238-8080 Fax: (613) 238-2098 Solicitors for the Respondents The law Society of upper Canada, Lawyers' Professional Indemnity Company, Nelhgan/Power, Royal Trust Corporation of Canada and a: agents to the Solicitors for George Gaty

ANDTO:HamiltonAppotive LLP Barristers & Solicitors

11th Floor, 150 Metcalfe Street, Ottawa, Ontario K2P 1P1 Eric Appotive Tel: (613) 238-8400 Fax: (613) 238-4085 Solicitors for the respondent Peat Marwick Thome Inc.

AND TO: Piazza Brooks Barristers & Solicitors 309 Cooper Street, Suite 202, Ottawa, Ontario K2P OG5 Tel: (613) 238-2244

Fax: (613) 238-3382

Solicitors for the Respondents Samuel Talbert and Colette Talbert

NOTICE TO THE RESPONDENTSTO THE MOTION: A respondent to the motion may serve and file a response to this motion within 10 days after service of the motion. If no response is filed within that time, the motion will be submitted for consideration to a Judge or the Registrar, as the case may be.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA

(ON APPEAL FROM THE SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE and COURT OF APPEAL, FOR THE PROVINCE OF ONTARIO)

BETWEEN:

REDDY RAJAGOPAL CHAVALI, REDDY KRIS HNAVENI CHAVALI,

REDDY VENKATA SUBBARAMI CHAVALI, SADANA CORPORATION LTD., VAHINI HOLDINGS LTD., MERU HOLDINGS LTD., 715048 ONTARIO LTD.,715040 ONTARIO LTD., KSHAMA CORPORATION, LYON LAURIER DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, NIKOLAUS WOLF and LYON LAURIER PLACE DEVELOPMENT LTD.

Applicants

-and­

THE LAW SOCIETY OF UPPER CANADA and LAWYER'S PROFESSIONAL INDEMNITY COMPANY, NELLIGAN/POWER, GEORGE GATY, ROYAL TRUST CORPORATION OF CANADA, PEAT MARWICK THORNE INC., SAMUEL TALBERT and COLLETTE TALBERT

Respondents

AFFIDAVIT

1, HARDEV SINGH, DO HEREBY MAKE OATH AND SAY AS FOLLOWS: 1. THAT I am the Secretary General and one of the Board of Directors of the Sikh Social and Educational Society of Toronto and also acted as the director of South Asian Social Services Organization of Toronto and as such have knowledge of the matter deposed hereto except where stated to be based upon information and belief and where so stated I verily believe them to be true.

2. THAT we the Board of Directors of the Sikh Social and Educational Society of Toronto, Ontario, Canada, comprising of over 60,000 members understand that the Applicants Mr. Reddy Rajagopla Chavali, Mrs Reddy Krishnaveni Chavali and their Son Dr. Reddy Venkatasubbarami Chavali [Dr. Ram Chavali], resident of U.S.A.for the past 19 years, have applied for Leave to Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada from the Judgments of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice and Ontario Court of Appeal finding them as vexatious litigants under section 140 Courts of Justice Act. We are familiar with the litigation of Chavali family, which is being delayed for the past 15 years and can be seen on the Website of Reddvchavali.ner. I received several telephone calls from various other different Immigrant and Canadian Citizens organizational groups involving several hundreds of thousands regarding the unfair treatment and injustice and would like to intervene . There were several Local News Paper articles :Voice, India Abroad] written on the injustice done to the Chavali family, by the Ex-Attomey General of Ontario, Charles Hamick and certain members of the judiciary [example Justice Cumming]. There were interviews of Reddy Chavali by the CIUT Radio. The Radio Talk CIUT[89.5 F.M., University of Toronto] was on May 28, 2004, July 9, 2004 and March 18, 2005, especially relating to the injustice done to the Chavalis, Immigrants and the Minority Groups of Canada.

3. THAT I was involved with the Chavalis' litigation for the past 14 years and I wrote as Director of South Asian Social Services Organization wrote a fourteen (14) page detailed letter of complaint to the Honourable Chief Justice Antonio Lamer, stating miscarriage of Justice, judicial misconduct of Cunningham .f„ further detailing some third parties who witnessed the discrimination against the Chavlies, members of South Asian Social Services organization. There was a Public Protest and card rally on September 24, 1992 for denial of Justice and their Trials of Chavalis, the Canadian Citizens, since 1992 who were defrauded their assets in its entirety worth over $57 Million in 1990­

4. THAT on December 15, 1992, Judicial Council of Canada responded to us regarding Mr. Justice Cunningham, with no tangible results. On the other hand, regional Senior Justice Desmarais removed Cunningham J., from hearing the Chavalis' case on April 20, 1994, thereby admitting the bias and unfair treatment of Chavalis, by then the damage was done.

5. THE FOLLOWING FEW EXAMPLES DEMONSTRATE THE INJUSTICES DONE TO CHAVALIS

(i) That there was never, ever, challenge to the cause of action of Chavalis' Actions under the Rules of Civil procedure by the Defendants/Respondents;

(ii) Several Judges including the Court of Appeal Judges ordered Trial of 7 actions after a careful review of the Grounds and causes of actions of fraud, theft, unlawful search and seizure, theft, misuse of trust funds and trust assets, destruction of property, unlawful conspiracy to defraud and fraud on court by the lawyers as Officers of the Court, etc.;

(iii) Are the members of LSUC, LPIC acting for the Respondents and Applicants Chavalis allowed to deliberately conspire not to disclose the true facts[ Example not to disclose final order of December 6, 1993 of Cunningham J. before the Court of Appeal on January 10, 1994] to cause irreparable damage to the Chavalis;

(iv) The LSUC, LPIC and AGO are allowed to harass with Private detectives and discriminate Chavalis, clients of their member lawyers by not investigating on the complaints of Chavalis on their member lawyers [Example Arthur Ault was investigated and disbarred on October 28, 1997 by others but not Chavalis' complaints since May, 1991; similar complaints on Mr. Andre Bluteau, Mr.O'Brien of Nelligan/Power, now representing LSUC, LPIC, and others]

(v) Duty of Lovalty: It is essential to the integrity of the adrninistration of justice and it is of

high Public importance that Public Confidence in the integrity be maintained. Unless a litigant is assured of the undivided loyalty of the lawyer, neither the Public nor the litigant will have confidence that the legal system, which may appear to them to be a hostile. (vi) The value of an independent bar is diminished unless the lawyer is free from conflicting interests, loyalty in that sense, promotes effective representation, on which the problem solving capability of an adversarial system rests.

(vii) Impartiality of Judges and judicial system is essential to maintain the integrity of the Justice system

6. THAT We as Public interest groups intend to intervene to provide this Honourable Court with a fresh perspective on an important Constitutional or Public law issue. Leave to intervene involves on the legal issues arising out of the facts before the Court and are not dealt with by the parties.

7. THAT I Was in the Court room on March 30, 1998, before Mr. Justice Mandel, a Trial Judge [arranged by Mr. Justice Wilkins, who stated that it is a fraud case and there is no impediment for the action against Arthur Ault, disbarred lawyer, Kanny Ng, a Chartered accountant removed from the Accountants' membership and George Gaty, a private financier (97-CV-120561) to proceed to Trial there must be a Trial for 5 weeks commencing March 30, 1998] ready to proceed with the Trial before all the solicitors forall the defendants and Mr and Mrs. Reddy Chavali, witnesses. When Reddy Chavali stood up to make opening statement, Trial Judge Mr Justice Mande I stated that Judge Cumming ran to his chambers, just minutes before the Trial commencement and handed over his decision of declaring Mr and Mrs. Chavali and his son Dr. Ram Chavali and their companies as frivolous and vexatious litigants and hence he could not proceed with the Trial.

8. THAT from the Bill of Costs produced by the Law Society of Upper Canada, there have been telephone calls between the presiding Judge Cumming and the Law Society been conference telephone calls between ,fudges, Solicitors for the Law Society of Upper Canada [LSTJC] and the Lawyer's Professional Indemnity Company [LPIC] and the Attorney General of Ontario[AGO], without the knowledge of the Chavalis or their solicitors; and there was a telephone conversation by Cumming J. with the solicitors for the LSUC and LPIC, prior to the hearing of the Application under section 140 Courts of Justice Act, on March 12-13, 1998, without the knowledge of Chavalis and their solicitor. This is a clear example o£ the denial of equal treatment.

9. The Order of Cramming J. of March 30, 1998 is not in accordance with the evidence. before him. The order is in clear violation of Charter of Rights guaranteed under the Canadian Constitution especially violation of s.7 fundamental Justice and discriminatory treatment under s.15 of the Charter. Mr. Cumming J. failed to give the opportunity to present the Chavalis' case by refusing the adjournment as requested by their incompetent lawyer Jerry Levitan. It is a clear denial of fair and Public hearing especially the manner of stopping the Trial scheduled on March 30, 1998.

THAT I make this Affidavit in support of the motion for Intervention on Application

for Leave to Appeal and for no other improper purpose.

SWORN BEFORE ME at mississauga Ontario , this 19`b day of ) September A D 2005 )

)

Hatdev Singb

A Cormmissioner for taking affidavits

Raminderpai Singh Sidhu Barrister, Solicitor & Notary Public 1380 Cardiff Blvd Unit #2 mississauga Ontario

1. In reply to the Application as public interest Intervener to our Application for Leave to Appeal , made by Mr. Hardev Singh, Secretary General, of the Sikh Social and Educational Society of Toronto, and ex-Director of South Asian Social Services Organization of Toronto, to the Supreme Court of Canada in Court File number 31006 is acceptable to the Applicants, as they strongly believe that the legal issues as to the truth arising out of the facts before the Court are of National and Public importance and their submissions will be useful to the Court.

2. We are also enclosing the letter dated August 5, 2005 and signed by the Directors of the Sikh Social and Educational Society of Toronto for your information, who intend to have representation of a lawyer/legal counsel in this Application. There is common interest in truth and justice and are intervening as friends of this Honourable Court

3. The Interveners have knowledge of the case herein, have been aware of the issues of truth before the Court and have participated earlier in the interest of the Public, especially the duress, humiliation and stress caused for the Applicants by the Law Society of Upper Canada and their member lawyers to evade the truth of the fraudulent activities.

4. The Interveners believe justifiably that Judge Cumming misdirected himself and turned away his mind from the truth of the facts and the documentary evidence of the abuse of process, by the Lawyers, as Officers of the Court, that they made palpable and overriding factual errors as disclosed by truth. Other Judges failed to review and reverse the truth of the palpable error and insulated from review caused deliberate injustice, creating general Public concern.

5. The standard of review of the trial Judge’s to grant a remedy under s.24(1) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms as authoritatively stated by Gaunthier J. in Elson v. Elson [1989] 1 S.C.R. 1367, at p.1375 as follows: “An appellate Court will be justified in intervening in a trial judge’s exercise of discretion only if the trial judge misdirects himself or if his decision is so clearly wrong as to amount to an injustice”.

2 [See also R.v. Carosella (1997) 1 S.C.R.80 at para. 48]. The Judges herein were clearly misdirecting themselves as to the truth of the facts and the law relating thereto

6. It is clearly believed that the interveners will provide to this Honourable Court with a fresh perspective on an important constitutional and Public law issue, the truth as it relates to legal authorities and the fact that they are not above the law.

7. Given the failure of the Respondents and the Government to make submissions on the issue of the violation of Rights under sections 1, 7, 15, 24 and 52, justifies the intervention of the Public in the interest of Justice where truth resides as it relates to Judicial and legal legislative authorities for all Canadians.

8. The brief issues relevant to the “abuse of process” claim in this case concerns in general the Public interest in truth as it relates to Judicial authorities are:

(i) the extent to which an objective and even-handed approach of the crown Attorney

of the Attorney General of Ontario and Law Society of Upper Canada, Lawyer’s

Professional Indemnity Company and their members lawyers are essential to the

checks and balances at all stages of the Justice system in which they are involved

as they relate to truth;

(ii) cruel and unusual punishment, oppressive conduct by the Law Society of Upper

Canada, in violation of its Statutory duty by harassing with discriminatory

treatment and denying guaranteed Rights of the clients of its member lawyers

who abused the judicial process with the aiding and abetting of the Government,

in the person of the Ex-Attorney General of Ontario, Charles Harnick/ employees/

its agents, who intentionally obstructed the truth Justice is said to uphold;

(iii) deliberate encouragement of the destruction of the Applicants/victims assets,

violating the life and liberty and security guaranteed under the Charter in its

protection of the truth;

(iv) criminally pre-planned denial of right to a fair trial for 16 years;

(v) deliberate obstruction of justice by stopping all trials, and

3

(vi) encouraging the discriminatory and fraudulent treatment of their member

lawyers’ clients making them victims of judicial fraudulent activities.

9. The abuse of the law by Judges standing by government lawyers and Law Society Lawyers has been a barrier to getting at the truth for many years.

10. The interveners have the Constitutional Right to pursue the matter on Constitutional grounds, to place before the Court the Rights and privileges of Canadian Immigrants as we are and Citizens and the Public at large

ALL OF WHICH IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED

Reddy Rajagopal Chavali

Reddy Krishnaveni Chavali

Dr. Reddy Venkatasubbarami Chavali


This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?