Dog License / Registration with MCD at Dwarka
994 views
Skip to first unread message
Ravi
Apr 5, 2013, 2:54:13 AM4/5/13
to dwarka-r...@googlegroups.com
Hi,
As dog owners will know that registration of pet dogs is required as per DMC Act - Article 399. It can otherwise attract penalties to dog owners.
Can anyone guide me how to get my dog registered with MCD. I have called by south west delhi MCD numbers (I stay at Dwarka) and even the officials who picked up my calls didn't know about it!!!
Regards,
Ravi
REJIMON C K
Apr 5, 2013, 4:16:19 AM4/5/13
to dwarka-r...@googlegroups.com
Yes
it is must- I hope all DOG LOVERS and Those lover their NEIGHBOURS will get their pets RAABI vaccinated and take certificates.
I been told these are available in SDMC-Najafgarh Zone- Health Department
Also highly appreciable if those lover collect waste left on footpaths. One side we wanted every one to pay attention to LITTERING otherside we only litter
it is must- I hope all DOG LOVERS and Those lover their NEIGHBOURS will get their pets RAABI vaccinated and take certificates.
I been told these are available in SDMC-Najafgarh Zone- Health Department
Also highly appreciable if those lover collect waste left on footpaths. One side we wanted every one to pay attention to LITTERING otherside we only litter
--
DWARKA FORUM (Regd) www.dwarkaforum.org
Membership Application- Please visit...
http://www.dwarkaforum.org/self-support/
We are on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/Dwarkaforum
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "DWARKA FORUM (Regd)" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to dwarka-residen...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
--
REJIMON C K.
Sent over wireless Network ... Google Nexus Phone.
Ravi
Apr 5, 2013, 5:08:52 AM4/5/13
to dwarka-r...@googlegroups.com
Hi
Dog Registrations with MCD for Dwarka residents can be done at Najafgarh Municipal Vet Dpt (VO Office), This is located opposite Suraj Cinema at Najafgarh.
Contact at phone number 011 - 28011245 before you visit to acertain the availability of the inspector / vet and to take an appointment. He goes out on area visits and hence may not be always available in the office. Sat & Sun are off.
Documents Required:
1) Photograph of the owner & pet. Normal album size picture required.
2) Vacination card's photocopy. Original also to be shown.
3) ID / Address Proof of the owner issued by any govement body.
4) Carry KCI copy also (If available - Not Mandatory)
Fee is 25/- Rs
This Registration is valid for 1 year from the effective date.
Hope this info helps!
Regards
Ravi
Arun Banerjee
Apr 5, 2013, 4:19:29 AM4/5/13
to dwarka-r...@googlegroups.com
There is a Vet Hospital at Palam crossing. they may be of help in this.
Arun Banerjee
REJIMON C K
Apr 26, 2013, 8:07:51 AM4/26/13
to dwarka-r...@googlegroups.com
On Sat 27thj At Nav Sansad Vihar CGHS Ltd, Plot No. 4, The Vet official will be visiting for formality on registration of Pets. If any wish to may visit & get details/
Meanwhile read this article
NEW DELHI: A man has landed in legal trouble after his pet dog allegedly bit a woman. A trial court has rejected the petition of the man challenging commencement of trial against him for alleged negligence in handling his dog .
Additional sessions Judge Virender Kumar Goyal dismissed the revision petition filed by the Rohini-resident who had challenged the trial court's order which had framed charges against him for his negligent conduct and causing hurt by dangerous means under the IPC.
The sessions court said there was no "illegality" in the trial court's order and as per the material placed on record, "prima facie" offences under the provisions of the IPC are made out against the man.
The judge upheld framing of charges against him, saying "revision petition is meritless and the same is dismissed and that nothing could be brought to its notice to set aside the order of the trial court."
According to the police, a case was lodged against the man in 2011 on a complaint of Shalini who had alleged that when she reached in the lane where the man was residing, his dog was roaming near the owner's house. The man challenged the magisterial court's order saying that there was not even an iota of evidence and that the order had been passed in mechanical manner without appreciating the material brought on record.
The woman said she had asked the man to handle the canine when it started barking. Though the man assured her that his dog would not bite her, the animal bit her when she moved ahead. The court noted that according to the medical record of the woman, she had sustained serious injuries.
"Offence under Section 289 of IPC, deals with negligent conduct with respect to animal, which is evident from the statement of Shalini as despite asking, the accused did not catch hold of his pet dog, while she was passing from there. So, there is no illegality or impropriety in the order of the trial court for framing charge under Section 289 IPC against the accused," the judge said.
Additional sessions Judge Virender Kumar Goyal dismissed the revision petition filed by the Rohini-resident who had challenged the trial court's order which had framed charges against him for his negligent conduct and causing hurt by dangerous means under the IPC.
The sessions court said there was no "illegality" in the trial court's order and as per the material placed on record, "prima facie" offences under the provisions of the IPC are made out against the man.
The judge upheld framing of charges against him, saying "revision petition is meritless and the same is dismissed and that nothing could be brought to its notice to set aside the order of the trial court."
According to the police, a case was lodged against the man in 2011 on a complaint of Shalini who had alleged that when she reached in the lane where the man was residing, his dog was roaming near the owner's house. The man challenged the magisterial court's order saying that there was not even an iota of evidence and that the order had been passed in mechanical manner without appreciating the material brought on record.
The woman said she had asked the man to handle the canine when it started barking. Though the man assured her that his dog would not bite her, the animal bit her when she moved ahead. The court noted that according to the medical record of the woman, she had sustained serious injuries.
"Offence under Section 289 of IPC, deals with negligent conduct with respect to animal, which is evident from the statement of Shalini as despite asking, the accused did not catch hold of his pet dog, while she was passing from there. So, there is no illegality or impropriety in the order of the trial court for framing charge under Section 289 IPC against the accused," the judge said.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages