Madras High Court
K.Indurani vs The Deputy Registrar on 17 October, 2024
C.R.P.No.1989 of 2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 17.10.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA
C.R.P.No.1989 of 2015 and
M.P.No.1 of 2015
K.Indurani ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Deputy Registrar,
O/o. Omalur Division of Deputy Registrar,
Omalur Taluk,
Salem District.
2.S-8541, Thathiampatti Primary
Agricultural Co-operative Bank,
Chikkanampatti Village and Post,
Omalur Taluk, Salem District.
3.G.Subramani (Former President)
4.R.Natarajan (Former Secretary)
5.R.Vanithamani (Former Senior Writer)
... Respondents
Prayer: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the
Constitution of India, to set aside the decree and judgment dated
30.06.2014 made in C.M.A (C.S) No.4 of 2009, on the file of the
Principal District Court (Co-operative Tribunal), Salem by confirming the
order dated 12.11.2008 made in Na.Ka.No.4666/2005/Sa.Pa., on the file
of the first respondent.
For Petitioner : Mr.C.Prabakaran
Page No.1 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P.No.1989 of 2015
For Respondents : Dr.S.Suriya, AGP for R1
Mrs.P.Vijaya Devi, GA for R2 to R5
ORDER
This Civil Revision Petition has been preferred to set aside the
decree and judgment dated 30.06.2014 made in C.M.A (C.S) No.4 of
2009, on the file of the Principal District Court (Co-operative Tribunal),
Salem by confirming the order dated 12.11.2008 made in
Na.Ka.No.4666/2005/Sa.Pa., on the file of the first respondent.
2. Heard Mr.C.Prabakaran, learned counsel for the petitioner and
Dr.S.Suriya, learned Additional Government Pleader for the first
respondent and Mrs.P.Vijaya Devi, learned Government Advocate for the
respondents 2 to 5 and perused the materials available on record.
3. The petitioner has filed a Civil Miscellaneous Appeal in C.M.A
(C.S) No.4 of 2009 challenging the surcharge proceedings of the Deputy
Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Omalur dated 12.11.2008 under Section
87 of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act. The allegation against
the petitioner is that the petitioner along with the Senior Head Clerk,
Secretary and President of the Societies, had misappropriated a sum of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Rs.27,70,198/- in respect of 167 jewel loan by playing fraud upon the
Bank. It is alleged that without getting the loan amount re-paid for the
jewel loan, the jewels have been returned and records have been
manipulated by making false entries in the Register by the petitioner and
others by entering into conspiracy between themselves. On the allegation
of creating loss to the Society, Section 87 proceedings have been initiated
against the petitioner. On the conclusion of the said proceedings, it is
held that the petitioner was also jointly liable for the loss. The petitioner
challenged the same by way of preferring a Civil Miscellaneous Appeal
before the Principal District Judge in CMA.(C.S) No.4 of 2009 and the
same was also dismissed on 30.06.2014 by confirming the order passed
under Section 87 proceedings dated 12.11.2008.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the
petitioner was acting under the supervision and direction of the President
and the Secretary and she did not have any authority to make individual
decisions. It is further submitted that when the Secretary, Cashier and the
Senior Clerk verified the accounts each and every time and made a
counter signature in the same, the petitioner cannot be held liable for the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
loss. The petitioner did not have any intention to misappropriate any
money and she is not a beneficiary from such illegal gains.
5. The learned Additional Government Pleader for the first
respondent submitted that it was the petitioner who was in-charge of the
accounts pertaining to the gold loan at the relevant point of time. Unless
the papers are manipulated from the level of the petitioner, the fraud
would not have occurred.
6. The fact that the petitioner was working in the said branch in the
very much point of time was not denied. The petitioner acted on the
direction of the superiors viz., the President and Secretary. Even though
the whole of the Bank is under the control of the President, the functions
of the Bank are being carried out only by various staff members who are
handling different sections of the Bank. So far as this petitioner is
concerned, she was working as a Clerk in the jewel loan section and she
has to cause the papers ready for jewel loan first and thereafter only, it
will get the signatures of all other members. So the petitioner could have
very much been aware of the fact that she is causing the papers even
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
without receiving the jewels.
7. The records which is in the custody of the petitioner cannot be
manipulated by others without the active participation of the petitioner.
The criminal proceedings have also been initiated against the petitioner
and others on the very same allegations. As the prima facie materials
have been available to bind the petitioner in the alleged scam and in fact,
she was handling the seat during the relevant point of time, the learned
Principal District Judge has arrived at a conclusion that the surcharge
proceedings initiated against the petitioner and others is legally
sustainable.
8. Some fraudulent entries have been made in the jewel loan
Register as though the loan amount availed by the members of the Bank
had been re-paid. The petitioner is said to have taken the said amount for
her personal gain. Since the investigation in respect of the criminal case is
pending and the fact that the petitioner was working in the same section
during the relevant point of time, the Principal District Judge has re-
evaluated the materials placed before the Deputy Registrar of Co-
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
operative Societies during the surcharge proceedings and had chosen to
confirm the same. As the orders have been passed by the learned
Principal District Judge only after making a proper reappraisal of the
merits of the matter, especially, by considering the fact that the petitioner
was very much in charge of the relevant seat, I feel no factual or legal
infirmity in the order of the Principal District Judge which might invite an
interference.
9. In view of the above stated reasons, this Civil Revision Petition
is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is
closed.
Index : Yes /No 17.10.2024
Speaking / Non-speaking
Neutral Citation : Yes / No
gsk
To
1.The Deputy Registrar,
O/o. Omalur Division of Deputy Registrar,
Omalur Taluk,
Salem District.
2.S-8541, Thathiampatti Primary
Agricultural Co-operative Bank,
Chikkanampatti Village and Post,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Omalur Taluk, Salem District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
R.N.MANJULA, J.
gsk
C.R.P.No.1989 of 2015 and
17.10.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
