Madras High Court
R.Raju vs The Deputy Registrar Of ... on 4 September, 2023
CRP. No.3367 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 04.09.2023
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI
CRP. No. 3367 of 2017
R.Raju
...Petitioners/Appellant
Vs.
1.The Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies,
Chengalpattu Region,
Chengalpattu.
2.The Special Officer,
Air Force Civilian Employees,
Co-operative Thrift and Credit Society Limited,
G.S. 145, Air Force Station, Tambaram,
Chennai.
... Respondents.
PRAYER : This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the
Constitution of India, praying to set aside the judgment and decree dated
21.06.2016 passed in Co-operative Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 3 of
2009 on the file of the learned Principal District Judge of kancheepuram
District, Chengalpattu confirming the order passed in Tha.Thi.No.1/2005-
2006 Ku.1 dated 19.07.2005 on the file of the Cooperative societies,
Chengalpattu Region, chenglepet on the file of the 1st respondent and allow
the civil Revision petition.
1
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRP. No.3367 of 2017
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Sadasharam
For R1 : Ms.P.Vijaya Devi
For R2 : Mr.L.P. Shanmugasundaram
ORDER
Challenging the impugned order dated 21.06.2016 passed in Co-
operative Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 3 of 2009 on the file of the
learned Principal District Judge of kancheepuram District, Chengalpattu, the
petitioner/appellant preferred this revision petition.
2. The brief facts of the case are as follow:
The first respondent initiated inspection on 18.03.2005, at Air Force
Civilian Employees Co-operative Thrift and Credit Society Limited (in
short ''society''), G.S. 145, Air Force Station, Tambaram, under Section 82
of Cooperative Societies Act, Chennai, based on the order dated
10.12.2004 and found that the petitioner misappropriated to the tune of
Rs.17,06,583/- in the society. Accordingly, proceedings were initiated
against the petitioner under Section 87 (1) of the Cooperative Societies Act
and also show notice was given to him by the Deputy Registrar of
Cooperative Society, Chengalpattu, and the petitioner also replied to the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRP. No.3367 of 2017
notice. In addition to this equiry was conducted and finally held that the the
petitioner misappropriated to the tune of Rs.17,00,000/- in the society
thereby directed him to pay the said amount with 18% interest. Challenging
the said findings the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Principal
District Judge of kancheepuram District, Chengalpattu, which
independently analysed the facts and evidence finally held that despite
giving several opportunities to the petitioner to submit his explanation but
he ramains exparte and also the petitioner has not prove his claim with
material evidence. Accordingly, dismissed the appeal. Challenging the same
the petitioner preferred this appeal.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner
filed writ petition before this court in W.P No. 21570 of 2005 challenging
the show cause notice issued by the first respondent while the matter was
pending before this Court the first appellate authority passed the exparte
order which is contravention of mandatory provisions of Section 87 of the
Tamil Nadu Cooperative Societies Act 1983. Further, Principal District
Judge of kancheepuram District, failed to appreciate this aspects hence he
prays to allow this petition.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRP. No.3367 of 2017
4. The learned counsel for the respondent submitted that on
10.12.2004 first respondent ordered for inspection under Section 82 of
TNCS Act, 1983 in to the affairs of the second respondent society.
Thereafter, inspection officer submitted his report on 18.03.2005, in which,
he recommended for surcharge proceedings to recover the loss of
Rs.17,06,583/- caused by the petitioner to the society by fabricating the
documents as if he repaid the amount to 246 borrowers of the loan in cash
and caused financial loss to the cooperative society. Thereafter, show cause
notice was issued against him on 12.04.2005 for which the petitioner replied
on 04.05.2005. Thereafter, summon issued to the petitioner to appear for
hearing on 20.05.2005 but he failed to appear. Subsequently, the petitioner
was requested to appear for hearing on 20.06.2005, 30.06.2005 but not
appeared and in his letter dated 14.06.2005 he requested to furnish relevant
documents and asked to fix another date. Thereafter he appeared before the
enquiry officer and collected relevant documents stated that he was not
appeared due to ill health. Further, the first respondent issued summons for
appearance on 14.07.2005 despite receiving summon the petitioner failed to
appear for hearing, under these circumstances the first respondent
proceeded surcharge proceedings and passed final award. Hence there is no
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRP. No.3367 of 2017
procedural lapse on the side of the first respondent. Hence he prays to
dismiss this petition.
5. Considering the fact that the main contention of the
petitioner is that he filed WP No.18642 of 2005 before this Court for
calling for entire records in surcharge proceedings and quash the same but
in the meantime the award was passed by the first respondent in the
surcharge proceedings. However, the said writ petition was dismissed by
this Court on 01.07.2019. Hence, the result of the writ petition was not in
favour of the petitioner. Further, as rightly pointed out by the respondents
from the year 2005 the petitioner has dragged on the proceedings and not
paid any amount to the society which is running for the benefit of the Air
Force Civilian Employees later as per the order of this Court the petitioner
deposited a sum of Rs.8,53,292/- to the second respondent but the
misappropriated amount was to the tune of Rs.17,06,583/- the entire amount
was not recovered by the society besides criminal proceedings also pending
against him. Further, the petitioner neither filed any material evidence to
disprove his case nor regularly appeared before the first respondent. Hence,
this Court does not find any merit in this petition. Accordingly, this Civil
Revision petition is dismissed and findings of the Court below is
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRP. No.3367 of 2017
confirmed. Further, the amount already deposited by the petitioner ordered
to be withdrawn by the first respondent.
6. In result, this Civil Revision petition is dismissed. No Cost.
Consequentially Connected Miscellaneous petition(s), if any, is/are closed.
04.09.2023
pbl
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRP. No.3367 of 2017
T.V.THAMILSELVI,J.
Pbl
CRP. No.3367 of 2017
04.09.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
