Madras High Court
S. Raja Alias Alagarsamy vs The Competent Authority And on 30 June, 2023
C.M.A.No.2387 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated: 30.06.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.2387 of 2017
S. Raja alias alagarsamy ... Appellant/Petitioner
Vs.
1. The competent Authority and
District Revenue Officer, Tiruppur
2. M/s R.M. Wealth Creations India Pvt. Ltd.,
No.2/145, A.B.C. Ettuvattam, E. Muthulingapuram,
Panchayat, Naduvapatti Post,
Sattur Taluk, Virudhu Nagar District.
Zonal Office at :
R.M. Golden City, Madappur Post,
Palladam Taluk, Tiruppur District.
Branch Office at :
Door No.391, Thangam Plaa, 2nd Floor,
Next to Usha Theatre,
Dharapuram Road, Tirupur,
( Represented by R2 and R3)
3. K. Maruthupandian
4. Sivamurugan
… Respondents/Respondents
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 173 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 to setaside the Fair and Final orders made in
1/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.2387 of 2017
O.a.No.37 of 2016 dated 21.03.2017 on the file of Special Court under
TNPID Act cases at Coimbatore.
For Appellant :M/s. K. Premkumar
For Respondent -1 :Mr. C. Jayaprakash
JUDGMENT
The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by one of the
Director of the Financial Institution challenging the order dated 21.03.2017
passed by the Second Respondent in O.A.No.37 of 2016 on the file of
Special Court under TNPID Act cases at Coimbatore on 21.03.2017,
wherein the Special Court has allowed the petition filed by the Competent
Authority/District Revenue Officer, Tiruppur, seeking to disburse the
amount lying in the custody of the competent authority to the depositors of
the First Respondent financial Institution.
2. The Appellant is the second accused and the Financial Institution
is the First Accused in C.C.No. 10 of 2015 on the file of Special Judge,
Special Court under TNPID Act, Coimbatore.
3. The Financial Institution/First Respondent has failed to return the
deposited amount of Rs.1,43,00,000/- to the depositors which resulted in
registration of criminal case in Cr.No. 31 of 2021 on the file of Inspector of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.2387 of 2017
police, E.O.W, Coimbatore. During pendency of trial the financial
institution/first respondent has remitted a sum of Rs. 1,43,00,000/- in favour
of the competent Authority/DRO and with accrued interest, accordingly
competent Authority filed a petition before the Special Court under TNPID
Act cases at Coimbatore, for disbursement of the amount to the depositors in
O.a.No.37 of 2016.
4. The Respondent/Accused 1 to 5 have filed counter before the
Special Court and denied the statement that they are liable to pay 100
depositors as per the final report filed in C.C.No.10 of 2015 and they are
having all the documents relating to the deposits made and the persons
shown in the list of Serial Numbers: 9,10,30,31,32 and 61 have already
been settled by the financial institutions. Similarly, some of the names of
the depositors not correct, and prayed that a detailed enquiry is necessary
before disbursement of the amount. The Special Court after considering the
submissions and perusing the record passed the impugned order and relevant
portion is as follows:
On perusal of Ex.P-1, which is the copy of FIR,
E.P2 is the Copy of Charge Sheet, Ex.P.3 is the List of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.2387 of 2017
the complaints/Depositors to whom the amount has to be
disbursed according to the petitioners Ex.P-4 to Ex.P.6
are all the xerox copies of the Deposit Receipts made in
the name of Competent Authority/District Revenue
Officer and Ex.P.7 is the Letter given by the Manager,
Indian Overseas Bank, Veerapandi Privu Branch,
Tiruppur regarding the deposits and Ex.p.8 is the Letter
given by the second and third Respondents stating that
they are having “ No Objection”. Hence the learned
Special Public prosecutor, who contended that the
petition isto be allowed.
In the result, the petition filed U/s 7(8)
TNPID Act is hereby allowed an the competent
Authority/DRO, Tiruppur is directed to disburse the
amount lying in the custody of the competent
Authority. However, it is open to the Respondents
to make their representation along with the
documents before the Competent Authority and the
competent Authority has to satisfy himself on t7he
basis of the documents produced by the
Respondents and disburse the amount in
accordance with the Law by getting undertaking
Affidavit from the depositors for making the
payment of the amount, in case if the claim made by
the depositors are found to be false. There shall be
no order as to cost.
6. Subsequently the present appeal has been filed by the Appellant
who is the Second Respondent/second accused on the ground that the first
respondent herein ought to have issued notices to all the interested persons
before disbursing the amount, but without affording an opportunity to the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.2387 of 2017
appellant and other persons, without considering production of proper
documents, the Competent Authority disbursed the entire amount on a single
day that too within two hours. Therefore, the act of the competent authority
is void and prays to set aside the order passed by the Special Judge.
7.The learned counsel for the appellant would submit that there is a
clear direction given to the competent Authority to consider the
representation if any received from the respondent/accused. With regard to
the objections for the disbursement of the amount, no such opportunity was
given to the respondent The trial of the criminal case is also in the final
stage and at that stage, the order passed by the Court for disbursement of
amount is unwarranted. He further submits that the no objection letter/Ex.P-
8 given by the second and third respondents before the Special Court is only
with regard to the refund of the amount to those who have not yet settled
and not to the persons who have already settled by the investors.
8.Per contra, the learned Government Advocate submitted that by
following the directions issued in the impugned order, the amounts have
been distributed to all the depositors. This fact is also been placed before the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.2387 of 2017
Special Court and the finding relating to disbursement of the amount
incorporated in the Judgment passed in C.C.10 of 2015 dated 22.03.2022.
He has also produced a copy of the Judgment passed by the Trial Court and
prays to dismiss the appeal.
9.Admittedly there is a direction given by the Special Judge to the
Competent Authority/DRO directing him to disburse the amount lying in his
custody. However, Appellant permitted to give representation if any for
identifying the depositors and to avoid the false claims. It is contended that
without affording an opportunity to the said representation, within a short
time, the amounts have been distributed to the depositors and thereby the
action of the Competent Authority is not proper. This appeal has been filed
Challenging the order of the Special Judge dated 21.03.2017 permitting the
First Respondent/Competent Authority to disburse the amount lying in his
custody. This impugned order is passed based on the petition filed by the
Competent Authority/DRO and “ No Objection Letter” Submitted on behalf
of the Respondents including this appellant herein.
10.The Special Judge has also given liberty to the Appellant herein to
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.2387 of 2017
give representation to the competent authority. The grievance raised in this
appeal is the manner in which the order of the Special Judge is being
enforced. The appellant has no grievance in the impugned order allowing the
competent authority to disburse the money to depositors.
11. Now, the Trial of the Criminal case is concluded and the
Judgment of the Special Court in C.C.No.10 of 2015 dated 22.03.2022
shows the list of depositors who have received their deposit amount in
Paragraph No.43 in compliance of impugned order. After recording report of
the competent authority and after recording the evidence of depositors, the
Trial Court has convicted the accused and also imposed sentence, which
shows that the accused persons were found guilty, for the charges framed
against them.
12. The Judgment of the Special Court cited supra, shows that the
impugned order directing the Competent authority/DRO to disburse the
amount to depositors already complied with and challenge of the impugned
order becomes now infructuous. The procedures adopted by competent
authority to comply the impugned order attracts different cause of action and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.2387 of 2017
same could not be considered in this appeal.
13. Accordingly this Court is of the view that there is no merit in this
appeal and the same is dismissed with liberty to the appellant to work out
the remedy in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs.
30.06.2023
smn
Index:Yes/No
Speaking Order:Yes/No
Neutral Citation Case: Yes/No
To:
1. The competent Authority and
District Revenue Officer, Tiruppur
2. M/s R.M. Wealth Creations India Pvt. Ltd.,
No.2/145, A.B.C. Ettuvattam, E. Muthulingapuram,
Panchayat, Naduvapatti Post,
Sattur Taluk, Virudhu Nagar District.
Zonal Office at :
R.M. Golden City, Madappur Post,
Palladam Taluk, Tiruppur District.
Branch Office at :
Door No.391, Thangam Plaa, 2nd Floor,
Next to Usha Theatre,
Dharapuram Road, Tirupur,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.2387 of 2017
( Represented by R2 and R3)
3. The Special Court under TNPID Act cases at Coimbatore.
K.RAJASEKAR,J.
smn
Civil Miscellaneous
Appeal No.2387 of 2017
30.06.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
