COURT FILE NO.: 393/08
DATE: 20090512
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
DIVISIONAL COURT
JENNINGS, PARDU AND LOW JJ.
B E T W E E N:
MOHINDER SINGH RAINAL (DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATION)
Plaintiff (Appellant)
- and -
(1) INDERJIT SINGH, G.S. LUTHRA, KARTAR SINGH MAROK, GIAN SINGH KANG, SADHU SINGH BRAR, AMAR SINGH TUSSAR
(2) THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION CANADA
Defendants (Respondents)
In Person
Nav Rai, for the (1) Respondents
Margherita Braccio, for the Deputy Attorney General of Canada
HEARD at Toronto: May 12, 2009
low J.: (Orally)
[1] Motions were brought by the defendants in the action for an order striking out the Statement of Claim for failure to disclose a reasonable cause of action. The motions were heard by Campbell J. who granted the orders. No error of law has been identified in the factum or in oral argument in relation to the finding that no reasonable cause of cause is disclosed in the pleading.
[2] The appellant asserts in his grounds for appeal that the motion judge had no jurisdiction to hear the motion. The appellant commenced an action in this Court. A judge of this Court has jurisdiction to hear and to decide both the action and any issues arising from the prosecution of the action.
[3] The appellant asserts that there was a violation of the basic principles of natural justice. He filed an affidavit at Tab 3 of the Appeal Book.
[4] The gist of the appellant’s grievance is that Campbell J. would not permit documentary evidence to be filed on the motion to strike. Campbell J. was correct in so ruling as no evidence is permissible on a Rule 21.01(1)(b) motion.
[5] Although it is clear that the appellant feels strongly that the affairs of the Temple are not being managed as he feels they should be, he has not pleaded a claim that is viable in law allowing him to seek redress on behalf of the Temple.
[6] For the foregoing reasons, the appeal must therefore be dismissed.
JENNINGS J.
[7] Given the relevant simplicity of the matters with which the respondents were confronted, I have endorsed the record as follows: “This appeal is dismissed for reasons of the Court delivered by Low J. Costs to respondents (1) and respondents (2) fixed at $1,500.00 each, inclusive of GST and disbursements, payable forthwith.”
JENNINGS J.
PARDU J.
LOW J.
Date of Reasons for Judgment: May 12, 2009
Date of Release: May 15, 2009
COURT FILE NO.: 393/08
DATE: 20090512
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
DIVISIONAL COURT
JENNINGS, PARDU AND LOW JJ.
B E T W E E N:
MOHINDER SINGH RAINAL (DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATION)
Plaintiff (Appellant)
- and -
(2) INDERJIT SINGH, G.S. LUTHRA, KARTAR SINGH MAROK, GIAN SINGH KANG, SADHU SINGH BRAR, AMAR SINGH TUSSAR
(2) THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION CANADA
Defendants (Respondents)
ORAL REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
LOW J.
Date of Reasons for Judgment: May 12, 2009
Date of Release: May 15, 2009