Latest Cases & Opinions

REF: REHABILITATION AND SOCIAL INTEGRATION

Lok Nayak Jai Prakash Narayan Hospital and Lady Hardinge Medical College Hospital highlights extreme ignorance of law – Hospitals gave consent forms to give up unwanted new-borns – Indian Express – Express newsline 15.2.2011 page 1

FACTS   Two Government hospitals named above provided consent forms to sign and surrender their little unwanted new born babies for adoption. While the LNJP hospital form is titled “CONSENT FORM FOR RELINQUISHING RIGHTS OVER NEW BORN INFANT AND PERMISSION FOR ADOPTION” LHMC has a separate Section with its provision in its Neo-natal record form.

Women gave birth to twins. One was still born and the parents decided to give up the second a girl, since they already had two daughters.

LEGAL OPINION

    The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007 G.S.R. 679 (E) dated 26.10.2007 with effect from 26.10.2007 clearly provides for the circumstances for surrendering of the children, and making them legally free for adoption.

    Under rule 33(4) Parents have to approach the CWC and after “serious efforts to counsel the parents”, if committee feels it is inevitable case, a deed of surrender in form XV has to be executed on a non-judicial stamp paper in the presence of the committee. After this, adoption agencies have TO WAIT TWO MONTHS, the specified reconsideration time given to biological parents.

    LNJP & LHMC highlights extreme ignorance of law. Both at the level of hospitals and also by adoption agencies which accepts the children. Such forms seem to authorize the dumping of babies.

ACTION SUGGESTED

    This is clear cut violation of rule 33 (4) and Section 23 of The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007 G.S.R. 679 (E) dated 26.10.2007 provides punishment of six months imprisonment or fine or both. Let the police authorities investigate the matter and the wrong-doer howsoever high he may be, law is above them.  Hospitals’ administration are more responsible for fixing responsibility of such officers at the helm of affairs and the responsibility may be fixed against all those who are responsible for such act including the action under Service Rules for dereliction of duty and such criminal acts.

    It would not be out of place to mention that the Adoption Agencies are clearly hand in glove with the hospital authorities and also that they have been doing all those criminal acts merely for the heck of money and other high stakes involved in the matter.

    Note should be taken about the slumber in which the Ministry of Health etc. are being found in such cases and those responsible for such negligence should also be taken to task after identifying the officers responsible for such neglicence.

 

 

(C.J.Gupta)
Cell: 9810497062
PANEL LAWYER ALL INDIA LEGAL AID CELL
ON CHILD RIGHTS
     (Established under Delhi Legal Services Authority and Bachpan Bachao Andolan under the aegis of National Legal Services Authority.)
L-6, Kalkaji, New Delhi-110019
Phone: 26224899 FAX  26236818 Email info@bba.org.in

c.c. to:-

  • The Hon’ble Chairman, National Human Rights Commission, Faridkot House, New Delhi-110001
  • The Member Secretary, National Legal Services Authority, Jamnagar House, Shahjahan Road, New Delhi-110001
  • The Member Secretary, Delhi Legal Services Authority, Patiala House, New Delhi
  • The Medical Superintendents – Lok Nayak Jai Prakash Narayan Hospital and Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital, New Delhi
  • The Commissioner of Police, Police Hdqrs., I.P.Estate, new Delhi-110002 for information and initiating necessary action.

For information and necessary action please.

unreasonable and illegal demands, and as such, apparently the facts and circumstances set out in the notice under reply are totally false and the same are specifically repudiated and are vehemently denied. Parawise reply to the notice is given hereunder:-

  1. That contents of para 1 of your notice is correct only to the extent that my client had introduced himself to be the person having right, title and interest inflate No.17, ground floor, situated at DDA Janta Flats, Tigri, New Delhi-110062. Other allegations are only misleading besides being malicious. There could have been no agreement for selling, transferring and conveying my client’s interest in the said flat “unconditionally” as recorded in para of your notice. It is also wrong that the property was to be transferred for the total consideration mentioned in this para. On the contrary, your client was also to pay for the related expenses.
  2. That the contents of para 2 of your notice are once again misleading and do not clearly and/or fully describe the arrangement. Your client had not left any authenticated copy of the said agreement with my client, therefore, he is not in a position to readily comment on it. However, it remains a fact that there was specific time period during which your client was to fulfill her obligations more particularly about paying the entire balance sale consideration. It was also agreed that the property was to be sold within the period specified in the agreement purported to have been signed on 3.4.2008 as mentioned in your notice.
  3. That the allegations made in para 3 of your notice are wholly misleading and misconceived. Your client’s acts have neither been prompt nor showed any interest after having signed the agreement. The factum of payment for which your client must have obtained the receipt is not a matter in issue at this stage especially when the agreement was admittedly signed on 3.4.2008 and after that your client had slept over the matter owing to her inability to pay the balance sale consideration. Needless to say that the subsequent allegations are only a concocted story intended to cover up the failure of your client to fulfill her part of the obligations in the deal and therefore, the same are controverted.
  4. That without prejudice to the other contentions of my client, the issue of such payment having been made to my client is a subject matter of record and receipt which may be available with your client.
  5. That the allegations contained in para 5 of the notice are wholly misleading, baseless, mischievous, wrong and hence denied. It is not admitted that the factum of your client being a teacher or salaried class was explained to my client or that he had been given to understand that your client intended to raise any loan for purchase of the flat through bank. It was entirely your client’s prerogative for arranging such loan through bank or otherwise from resourced that may have been available to her. However, it is absolutely wrong and denied that my client had given any such assurance about obtaining the NOC or no-dues certificate from the DDA or providing to your client the original documents of title for facilitating the obtaining of the alleged loan from any bank. Your client had never come forward with any such suggestion nor could my client accept any such term or condition in view of the fact that properties allotted by the DDA such as the flat in question could not be the subject matter of any outright sale conducted through any sale deed as alleged. Thus there could have been no question of my client providing the alleged No objection or no dues certificate from the DDA. Needless to say that this story has been coined merely with the malafide intent to cover up the fatal delay attributable directly to your client to pay up the entire balance sale consideration for close to three years. It is also apparent even from contentions in your notice that your client had never taken up the issue of purchase of such flat after making payment of the entire balance sale consideration for a period of almost three years. Although the time agreed for conducting such sales is never more than one or two months, yet your client had neither come forward with the balance payment nor had taken up the matter for close to three years. It is only when even the period of limitation for enforcing any agreement is about to expire that your client has come forward with this story of the NOC/No-dues certificate, etc. and also the clearance of the alleged water, electricity, house-tax dues, etc. Such issue is settled merely by including the clause in the documents that till the date of such transaction, the vendor shall be liable to make all those payments while the vendee shall make all payments relating to the period subsequent to such date of sale. However, your client could never arrangement for payment of the entire balance sale consideration and hence could not get the documents of title executed in her favour in the format which is usually the procedure adopted for such sale of flats allotted by the DDA. It is apparent that either your client is very naïve about the situation or those advising her have chosen the present manner to attempt and circumvent the law in this manner which does not take my client by any surprise but also does not change the legal position relevant to the situation.
  6. That without prejudice to the situation explained in para 5 of this reply, the allegations made in this para are wholly unwarranted and irrelevant. It is denied that my client had ever assured your client to hand over any document other than the agreement which could have been sufficient to go through any transaction for loan if such loans were permitted to be granted against the execution of the set of documents including the Agreement to Sell, GPA., Will, receipt for consideration and the letter of possession etc. which are normally executed at the time of such clandestine transfers of DDA property and this procedure is being followed in a large number of such transactions. Any thing suggested in this para to the contrary is only false and hence denied in its entirety. It is absolutely wrong and hence denied that my client had made any such or alleged promises or that the agreement was conditional to the fulfillment of such promise by my client. In fact, your client’s continued silence in the matter is fatal to her claim which had extinguished itself upon expiry of the period settled for payment of the entire balance sale consideration in which your client had miserably failed.
  7. That the allegations contained in para 7 of your notice are absolutely wrong and hence denied in their entirety. Your client did not have the means for paying the balance sale consideration and might have been running around for making such arrangement and had consequently failed to contact my client even for once during all these years. There could have been no question of my client providing the no-dues certificates or the like to your client. All such sales are conducted on “as is where is basis” unless specifically provided otherwise. It is denied that my client had failed to listen to any alleged request of your client. It is wrong and denied that my client can beheld solely responsible for the legal consequences unlike your client who had failed to fulfill the vital condition of making payment of the entire balance amount of sale consideration to my client. Without prejudice to the other legal rights of my client, you will appreciate that there is always a fixed period clause for enforcing the agreement to sell and my client not have been expected to wait indefinitely merely because your client had paid the advance amount being part of the sale consideration.
  8. That the allegations contained in para 8 of the notice are wholly false, baseless and wrong besides being preposterous when your client claims that possession was expected to be handed over to your client upon the payment of advance money. Other allegations made in this para are wholly irrelevant to the issues involved resulting from the agreement to sell and hence my client does not feel the necessity to offer any explanation in that behalf nor is your client entitled to seek any such explanation. The allegations have also been made with intent to over-awe and pressurize my client inspite of the fact that the issues do not relate to the matters in dispute inter-se your client and mine.
  9. That the allegations contained in para 9 of your notice are merely repetitive in nature and have been dealt with already in the foregoing paras of this reply. Those allegations are not only false and untrue but have also been made with a view to cover up your client’s failure to have sufficient arrangement for payment of the balance entire sale consideration.

 

    The operative para of your notice is wholly misleading, wrong and hence denied in its entirety. Needless to say that the present notice is intended merely to go on a fishing expedition with regard to your client’s claim of having made payment of the advance amount but since your client had failed to fulfill her part of the obligations in making payment of the entire balance sale consideration, she has got no right to stake any claim on that basis muchless claiming back the amount of advance claimed to have been paid to my client which would have stood forfeited after the expiry of the agreed period during which the balance payment was to be made.

    However, if inspite of this reply, your client chooses to proceed with any ill-advised action, the same shall be contested with all the contempt it deserves but entirely at the risk and responsibility of your client as to costs and consequences.

    Please advise your client accordingly.

 

 Raj Singh
Advocate


unreasonable and illegal demands, and as such, apparently the facts and circumstances set out in the notice under reply are totally false and the same are specifically repudiated and are vehemently denied. Parawise reply to the notice is given hereunder:-

10. That contents of para 1 of your notice is correct only to the extent that my client had introduced himself to be the person having right, title and interest inflate No.17, ground floor, situated at DDA Janta Flats, Tigri, New Delhi-110062. Other allegations are only misleading besides being malicious. There could have been no agreement for selling, transferring and conveying my client’s interest in the said flat “unconditionally” as recorded in para of your notice. It is also wrong that the property was to be transferred for the total consideration mentioned in this para. On the contrary, your client was also to pay for the related expenses.

11. That the contents of para 2 of your notice are once again misleading and do not clearly and/or fully describe the arrangement. Your client had not left any authenticated copy of the said agreement with my client, therefore, he is not in a position to readily comment on it. However, it remains a fact that there was specific time period during which your client was to fulfill her obligations more particularly about paying the entire balance sale consideration. It was also agreed that the property was to be sold within the period specified in the agreement purported to have been signed on 3.4.2008 as mentioned in your notice.

12. That the allegations made in para 3 of your notice are wholly misleading and misconceived. Your client’s acts have neither been prompt nor showed any interest after having signed the agreement. The factum of payment for which your client must have obtained the receipt is not a matter in issue at this stage especially when the agreement was admittedly signed on 3.4.2008 and after that your client had slept over the matter owing to her inability to pay the balance sale consideration. Needless to say that the subsequent allegations are only a concocted story intended to cover up the failure of your client to fulfill her part of the obligations in the deal and therefore, the same are controverted.

13. That without prejudice to the other contentions of my client, the issue of such payment having been made to my client is a subject matter of record and receipt which may be available with your client.

14. That the allegations contained in para 5 of the notice are wholly misleading, baseless, mischievous, wrong and hence denied. It is not admitted that the factum of your client being a teacher or salaried class was explained to my client or that he had been given to understand that your client intended to raise any loan for purchase of the flat through bank. It was entirely your client’s prerogative for arranging such loan through bank or otherwise from resourced that may have been available to her. However, it is absolutely wrong and denied that my client had given any such assurance about obtaining the NOC or no-dues certificate from the DDA or providing to your client the original documents of title for facilitating the obtaining of the alleged loan from any bank. Your client had never come forward with any such suggestion nor could my client accept any such term or condition in view of the fact that properties allotted by the DDA such as the flat in question could not be the subject matter of any outright sale conducted through any sale deed as alleged. Thus there could have been no question of my client providing the alleged No objection or no dues certificate from the DDA. Needless to say that this story has been coined merely with the malafide intent to cover up the fatal delay attributable directly to your client to pay up the entire balance sale consideration for close to three years. It is also apparent even from contentions in your notice that your client had never taken up the issue of purchase of such flat after making payment of the entire balance sale consideration for a period of almost three years. Although the time agreed for conducting such sales is never more than one or two months, yet your client had neither come forward with the balance payment nor had taken up the matter for close to three years. It is only when even the period of limitation for enforcing any agreement is about to expire that your client has come forward with this story of the NOC/No-dues certificate, etc. and also the clearance of the alleged water, electricity, house-tax dues, etc. Such issue is settled merely by including the clause in the documents that till the date of such transaction, the vendor shall be liable to make all those payments while the vendee shall make all payments relating to the period subsequent to such date of sale. However, your client could never arrangement for payment of the entire balance sale consideration and hence could not get the documents of title executed in her favour in the format which is usually the procedure adopted for such sale of flats allotted by the DDA. It is apparent that either your client is very naïve about the situation or those advising her have chosen the present manner to attempt and circumvent the law in this manner which does not take my client by any surprise but also does not change the legal position relevant to the situation.

15. That without prejudice to the situation explained in para 5 of this reply, the allegations made in this para are wholly unwarranted and irrelevant. It is denied that my client had ever assured your client to hand over any document other than the agreement which could have been sufficient to go through any transaction for loan if such loans were permitted to be granted against the execution of the set of documents including the Agreement to Sell, GPA., Will, receipt for consideration and the letter of possession etc. which are normally executed at the time of such clandestine transfers of DDA property and this procedure is being followed in a large number of such transactions. Any thing suggested in this para to the contrary is only false and hence denied in its entirety. It is absolutely wrong and hence denied that my client had made any such or alleged promises or that the agreement was conditional to the fulfillment of such promise by my client. In fact, your client’s continued silence in the matter is fatal to her claim which had extinguished itself upon expiry of the period settled for payment of the entire balance sale consideration in which your client had miserably failed.

16. That the allegations contained in para 7 of your notice are absolutely wrong and hence denied in their entirety. Your client did not have the means for paying the balance sale consideration and might have been running around for making such arrangement and had consequently failed to contact my client even for once during all these years. There could have been no question of my client providing the no-dues certificates or the like to your client. All such sales are conducted on “as is where is basis” unless specifically provided otherwise. It is denied that my client had failed to listen to any alleged request of your client. It is wrong and denied that my client can beheld solely responsible for the legal consequences unlike your client who had failed to fulfill the vital condition of making payment of the entire balance amount of sale consideration to my client. Without prejudice to the other legal rights of my client, you will appreciate that there is always a fixed period clause for enforcing the agreement to sell and my client not have been expected to wait indefinitely merely because your client had paid the advance amount being part of the sale consideration.

17. That the allegations contained in para 8 of the notice are wholly false, baseless and wrong besides being preposterous when your client claims that possession was expected to be handed over to your client upon the payment of advance money. Other allegations made in this para are wholly irrelevant to the issues involved resulting from the agreement to sell and hence my client does not feel the necessity to offer any explanation in that behalf nor is your client entitled to seek any such explanation. The allegations have also been made with intent to over-awe and pressurize my client inspite of the fact that the issues do not relate to the matters in dispute inter-se your client and mine.

18. That the allegations contained in para 9 of your notice are merely repetitive in nature and have been dealt with already in the foregoing paras of this reply. Those allegations are not only false and untrue but have also been made with a view to cover up your client’s failure to have sufficient arrangement for payment of the balance entire sale consideration.

19. The operative para of your notice is wholly misleading, wrong and hence denied in its entirety. Needless to say that the present notice is intended merely to go on a fishing expedition with regard to your client’s claim of having made payment of the advance amount but since your client had failed to fulfill her part of the obligations in making payment of the entire balance sale consideration, she has got no right to stake any claim on that basis muchless claiming back the amount of advance claimed to have been paid to my client which would have stood forfeited after the expiry of the agreed period during which the balance payment was to be made.

    However, if inspite of this reply, your client chooses to proceed with any ill-advised action, the same shall be contested with all the contempt it deserves but entirely at the risk and responsibility of your client as to costs and consequences.

    Please advise your client accordingly.

 

 

 Raj Singh
Advocate

 
Bachpan Bachao Andolan Delhi Legal Services AuthorityNational Legal Services Authority