Telangana High Court
M/S Sri Sairam Constructions, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 3 March, 2022
Bench: Satish Chandra Sharma, Abhinand Kumar Shavili
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI
WRIT PETITION No.23004 of 2018
ORDER: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma)
Learned counsel for the parties have drawn the attention
of this Court towards the order dated 25.02.2022 passed by this
Court in W.P.No.18131 of 2013 and batch and the same reads
as under:-
"Learned Special Counsel for the State of Andhra
Pradesh Sri P.Govind Reddy, at the outset, has argued before
this Court that the matters relate to Agrigold Farms Estates
India Private Limited, Akshaya Gold Farms Villas India
Limited etc. The companies have received large number of
deposits from various depositors and writ petitions and public
interest litigations have been filed before this Court seeking
refund of the amounts deposited by the depositors. He has
stated that the Andhra Pradesh Protection of Depositors of
Financial Establishments Act, 1999 (for short, "the Act"),
takes care of such depositors. He has straightaway drawn the
attention of this Court towards Sections 6, 9, 10 and 11 of the
Act.
Sections 6, 9, 10 and 11 of the Act are reproduced as
under:-
"6. Special Court:- (1) For the purpose of this
Act, the Government shall, with the concurrence of
the Chief Justice of the High Court, by notification,
constitute a District and Sessions Court as a Special
Court.
(2) No Court including a Court constituted
under the Presidency Towns Insolvency Act, 1909
2
(Central Act III of 1909) and the Provincial Insolvency
Act,
1920, (Central Act V of 1920), other than the Special
Court shall have Jurisdiction in respect of any matter
to which the provisions of this Act apply.
(3) Any pending case in any other Court to
which the provisions of this Act apply shall stand
transferred to the Special Court.
(4) The Special Court shall, on an application
by the competent authority, pass such order or issue
such direction as may be necessary for the equitable
distribution among the depositors of the money
realised from out of the property attached.
9. Security in lieu of attachment:- Any
financial establishment or person whose property has
been or is about to be attached under this Act may, at
any
time, apply to the Special Court for permission to give
security in lieu of such attachment and where the
security offered and given is in the opinion of the
Special Court, satisfactory, and sufficient, it may
cancel, the ad-interim order of attachment or, as the
case may be, refrain from passing the order of
attachment.
10. Administration of property attached:-
The Special Court may, on the application of any
person interested in any property attached under this
Act, and after giving the Competent Authority an
opportunity of being heard, make such orders as the
Special Court considers just and reasonable for ,--
(a) Providing from such of the property attached
as the applicant claims an interest in such sums as
may be reasonably necessary for the maintenance of
the applicant and of his family, and for expenses
connected with the defence of the applicant where
criminal proceedings have been instituted against
him in the Special Court under section 5;
3
(b) Safeguarding so far as may be practicable the
interest of any business affected by the attachment
and particularly by in the interest of any partners in
such business.
11. Appeal:- Any person including the
Competent Authority, if aggrieved by an order of the
Special Court, may appeal to the High Court within
thirty days from the date of such order."
A statement at bar has been made that a Special Court
i.e., the Court of Principal District and Sessions Judge, Eluru,
has been constituted for the cases related to Agrigold Farms
Estates India Private Limited, Akshaya Gold Farms Villas
India Limited etc., and the matters are pending before the
said Court. He has also informed that the competent
authority was also appointed long back in the matter.
Meaning thereby, all claims in respect of the depositors are to
be adjudicated by the Special Court constituted for the
purpose.
Learned Senior Counsel Sri P.B.Vijay Kumar has
stated before this Court that various orders have been passed
in the present cases and other connected matters from time to
time and the Special Court be directed to consider those
orders also while passing orders in respect of disbursement of
amount. Not only this, he has stated that an amount of
Rs.50,42,70,521/- is lying with the Registry of this Court and
therefore, the amount be transferred to the Special Court for
distribution of the same to the depositors.
After hearing the learned counsel for the parties in the
present matters, this Court is of the opinion that it is the
Special Court which is having jurisdiction to make equitable
distribution of the money realised, out of the property
attached, among the depositors.
Therefore, the amount of Rs.50,42,70,521/- along with
the accrued interest be transferred to the Special Court
constituted for the purpose. The petitioners before this Court
4
as well as all other depositors shall be free to file appropriate
applications in respect of their claims before the Special Court
by furnishing all minute details and the Special Court shall
proceed ahead in accordance with law keeping in view the
statutory provisions as contained in the Act.
It has been brought to the notice of this Court that in
some of the cases the petitioners are Banks. The said Banks
shall also be certainly free to file an application before the
Special Court.
It has further been brought to the notice of this Court
that there are two writ petitions i.e., W.P.Nos.23870 and
24347 of 2018 filed by the Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited
(BSNL). The BSNL shall also be free to approach the Special
Court or avail any other remedy available under the law.
It has also been brought to the notice of this Court
that certain properties are sold on account of the order passed
by this Court. Therefore, the Special Court shall now be free
to proceed ahead in accordance with law in respect of those
properties also.
Resultantly, all the writ petitions and the public
interest litigations are accordingly disposed of.
The miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall
stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
The Registry is directed to furnish the complete
proceedings in respect of all the writ petitions and the public
interest litigations to the Special Court."
In the light of the aforesaid, the present writ petition also
stands disposed of. The judgment dated 25.02.2022 delivered in
W.P.No.18131 of 2013 and batch shall be applicable mutatis
mutandis in the present case also.
5
Let a copy of the judgment delivered in W.P.No.18131 of
2013 and batch dated 25.02.2022 be kept on record in the
present case.
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand
closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
________________________
SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, CJ
_______________________
ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J
03.03.2022
JSU
