Prasad v Indiana Publications (NZ) Limited

[2013] NZHC 498

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

CIV2012-404-004172 [2013] NZHC 498

BETWEEN  RAJENDRA PRASAD Plaintiff

ANDINDIANA PUBLICATIONS (NZ) LIMITED & ORS

Defendants

Hearing:         (On Papers) Appearances: Plaintiff (In Person)

G Harrison for 1st to 8th Defendants

Judgment:      15 March 2013

JUDGMENT OF WHATA J

AS TO REQUEST FOR RECALL OF EARLIER JUDGMENT

[1]      In my judgment of 19 December 2012 I rejected Mr Prasad’s application for review of the decision of the Associate Judge to strike out the current proceedings. The following observation sets out the nub of my reasons:

[17]     Mr   Prasad   is   seeking   to   rewrite   history   through   these proceedings.  The Associate Judge was entirely correct to strike the proceedings  out.    If  Mr  Prasad  has  a  genuinely  fresh  claim,  not relating to final judgments of this Court or any other Court, then he will need to ensure that such pleadings do not seek directly or indirectly to relitigate those matters.

[2]      Mr  Prasad  now  applies  to  have  my  judgment  recalled  on  the  following grounds:

a)Copyright Matter:  That Applicant considers himself a Copyright Law specialist (Copyright Act 1994), in the history of this matter from  12/03.03  until  11/12/12  it  was  never  heard  before  any Copyright expertise Judge to understand Copyright language.

PRASAD V INDIANA PUBLICATIONS (NZ) LIMITED & ORS HC AK CIV 2012-404-004172 [15 March

2013]

b)Therefore this matter is decided by ignorance of Copyright Law, the very first Judgment CIV 2003-092-4034 upon which all decisions of all Courts is based is Copyright blind, given per incurriam

c)All other decisions are Copyright blind leading another Copyright blind which includes last one made on 11/12/12 in this matter

d)Ministry of Justice does not have ability or expertise to hear and make determination of Copyright matter based on Copyright Law

e)It relies on Blackie DCJ and Gary Harrison both mislead all Courts by ignorance of Law, therefore all decisions are misleading

f)        Ministry of Justice has stacked up several decisions in the history of this matter, based on Judgement signed by Blackie DCJ where Judgment has the following status:

Blackie DCJ does not even know the meaning of Copyright:

He neither compiled nor established any findings in this matter, Judgment was pre-compiled as a ready made Judgment, before the hearing of 02/06/05 (a date not fixed by Court) by jagdeo Lal (Instructing  solicitor  at  the  time),  Ravin  Law  (2nd   Defendant  in CIV 2003-092-4034) and Gary Harrison (Counsel) to avoid the firm fixture hearing on 20/07/05 with Thomas & Company

Blackie DCJ was given a family holiday in May 2005, retuning (sic) on 1st June 2005, to sign bogus Judgment CIV 2003-092-4034 of no breach and omit Mr Prasad as 1st Plaintiff so he cannot appeal Judgment and Respondents can infringe Copyright, in a Kangaroo Court situation.

Cost order made by Blackie DCJ against Sage Group Limited included family holiday against company, which company refused to pay

Accordingly  Blackie  DCJ  Judgment  of  CIV  2003-092-4034  is  a fraud upon the Court and cannot be relied upon for integrity or heard by New Zealand Court Judge, since fraud viatitates (sic) every transactions it enters and relates to the period from 12/03/03 and has its  effect  until  11/12/12  (Last  hearing  by  Wahata  (sic)  HCJ)  in CIV 2012-404-4172

[3]      I do not propose to burden this judgment with a lengthy recitation of the background.  In short, Mr Prasad is seeking to rechallenge earlier judgments and in particular a judgment of Judge Blackie.  His concern about that judgment and the reasons why he considered it to be wrong was squarely before me when I considered the review application, as were his complaints about other decisions which have previously affected him.  Other matters raised by Mr Prasad such as his expertise on copyright law are not a basis for recall.

[4]      Given those circumstances, I reject the application by Mr Prasad to have my judgment recalled.

Solicitors:

Parshotam & Co, Auckland –  [e-mail]

Copy to:     G M Harrison, Auckland –  [e-mail]

R Prasad, Auckland –  [e-mail]