Tripura High Court
Daffodils Associate Ltd vs Deputy Collector And Magistrate on 25 September, 2025
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
MFA No.03 of 2024
Daffodils Associate Ltd.,
Registered Office- GS Road, Ulubari,
Kamrup, Assam, Guwahati-781007
Local Office- At Dharmanagar under Dharmanagar P.S.,
North Tripura District
(represented by its Managing Director and Others) namely,
Md. Abu Sadeque Istiaque Ahmed Choudhury,
S/O Late Abdul Jalil Choudhury,
Managing Director of M/S Daffodils Associate Ltd.
....Appellant OP.
Versus
Deputy Collector and Magistrate,
Dharmanagar Sub-division,
P.S.-Dharmanagar, North Tripura
.......Respondent-applicant.
IN
CIVIL MISC. CASE NO.21 of 2017
Deputy Collector and Magistrate (Sri Dibyendu Das)
.....Petitioner
Versus
Daffodils Associate Ltd.
(represented by its Managing Director and other Directors)
......Opposite Party (OP).
For Petitioner (s) : Mr. Prasanta Kumar Pal, Adv.
Mr. Abhinandan Pal, Adv.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Saktimoy Chakraborty,Adv. General
Ms. Pinki Chakraborty, Adv.
Mr. Karnajit De, Addl. G.A.
Date of Hearing
and delivery of
Judgment and Order : 19.09.2025
Date of delivery of
Judgment and Order : 25.09.2025
Whether fit for
Reporting : NO
Page 2 of 14
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BISWAJIT PALIT
Judgment & Order
This appeal under Section 11 of the Tripura
Protection of Interest of Depositors (In Financial
Establishments) Act, 2000 is preferred challenging the
judgment and order dated 19.06.2024 delivered by Learned
Special Judge (TPID), North Tripura, Dharmanagar in case
No.Civil Misc.21 of 2017.
02. Heard Learned Counsel, Mr. P. K. Pal along with
Learned Counsel, Mr. A. Pal appearing on behalf of the
appellant OP and also heard Learned Advocate General, Mr. S.
Chakraborty assisted by Learned Counsel, Ms. P. Chakraborty
and Learned Addl. G.A., Mr. K. De appearing on behalf of the
State-respondent.
03. Taking part in the hearing, Learned Counsel, Mr.
P.K. Pal for the appellant OP drawn the attention of the Court
that the judgment delivered by Learned Special Judge, North
Tripura, Dharmanagar suffers from infirmities for which the
interference of the Court is required. Learned Counsel for the
appellant also submitted that against the appellant still there is
a criminal case pending under Jirania Police Station which is
pending for disposal. But the Learned Court of Special Judge
without appreciating the said fact delivered the judgment for
which the appellant has become prejudiced.
Page 3 of 14
04. It was further submitted by Learned Counsel for the
appellant that Learned Trial Court framed Issue Nos.(ii), (iv),
(v), (vi) and (vii) but at the time of delivery of judgment no
decision was given by Learned Trial Court in respect of Issue
No.(v). Learned Counsel also drawn the attention of the Court
that Learned Special Judge, (TPID), North Tripura,
Dharmanagar at the time of disposal of the case did not
consider the provision of Section 7(6) of TPID Act, 2000 and in
support of his contention Learned Counsel for the appellant
referred one judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India
in M.S. Sheriff and Ors. Vs. The State of Madras and Ors.
reported in (1954) 1 SCC 524 wherein in Para Nos.11, 12 and
13, the Hon'ble Apex Court observed as under:-
"11. We were informed at the hearing that two
further sets of proceedings arising out of the
same facts are now pending against the
appellant. One is two civil suits for damages for
wrongful confinement. The other is two criminal
prosecutions under Section 344 IPC for wrongful
confinement, one against each Sub-Inspector. It
was said that the simultaneous prosecution of
these matters will embarrass the accused. But
after the hearing of the appeal we received
information that the two criminal prosecutions
have been closed with liberty to file fresh
complaints when the papers are ready, as the
High Court records were not available on the
application of the accused. As these
prosecutions are not pending at the moment, the
objection regarding them does not arise but we
can see that the simultaneous prosecution of the
present criminal proceedings out of which this
appeal arises and the civil suits will embarrass
the accused. We have therefore to determine
which should be stayed.
12. As between the civil and the criminal
proceedings we are of the opinion that the
criminal matters should be given precedence.
There is some difference of opinion in the High
Courts of India on this point. No hard-and-fast
rule can be laid down but we do not consider
that the possibility of conflicting decisions in the
civil and criminal courts is a relevant
consideration. The law envisages such an
Page 4 of 14
eventuality when it expressly refrains from
making the decision of one court binding on the
other, or even relevant, except for certain
limited purposes, such as sentence or damages.
The only relevant consideration here is the
likelihood of embarrassment.
13. Another factor which weighs with us is that
a civil suit often drags on for years and it is
undesirable that a criminal prosecution should
wait till everybody concerned has forgotten all
about the crime. The public interests demand
that criminal justice should be swift and sure;
that the guilty should be punished while the
events are still fresh in the public mind and that
the innocent should be absolved as early as is
consistent with a fair and impartial trial. Another
reason is that it is undesirable to let things slide
till memories have grown too dim to trust. This,
however, is not a hard-and-fast rule. Special
considerations obtaining in any particular case
might make some other course more expedient
and just. For example, the civil case or the other
criminal proceeding may be so near its end as to
make it inexpedient to stay it in order to give
precedence to a prosecution ordered under
Section 476. But in this case we are of the view
that the civil suits should be stayed till the
criminal proceedings have finished."
Referring the same citation, Learned Counsel drawn
the attention of the Court that in absence of evidence on
record, Learned Special Court allowed the claim of the
respondent in absence of proper evidence on record and since
the criminal proceeding is still pending so there was no scope
on the part of Learned Special Judge to dispose of the case.
05. It was further submitted that it is not established
that the appellant is a chit fund company and property of the
appellant was acquired on the basis of money collected from
the consumers. In such a situation, in absence of proper
evidence on record there was no scope to pass any order in
favour of the respondent and urged for dismissal of the
judgment delivered by Learned Court of Special Judge with
costs.
Page 5 of 14
06. On the other hand, Learned Advocate General
appearing on behalf of the State drawn the attention of the
Court that this appeal is not maintainable and there is no
infirmity in the judgment delivered by Learned Special Judge
and furthermore, the appellant both by oral/documentary
evidence on record could not satisfy the Court that the
appellant Company does not come under the purview of TPID
Act and as such the Learned Special Judge rightly passed order
allowing the claim of the respondent and furthermore since the
appellant is a chit fund company so there is no merit in the
appeal filed by the appellant.
07. Learned Advocate General also drawn the attention
of the Court referring a judgment of Division Bench of this High
Court in WP(Crl) No.3 of 2014 wherein this High Court hence
disposed of the writ petition with certain directions to the
State-authorities regarding disbursement of the amount
realized to the consumers/customers after disposal of the
properties belonging to the chit fund companies. Finally
Learned Advocate General urged for dismissal of this appeal.
08. Now before coming to the conclusion let us discuss
about the subject matter of the appeal filed by the appellant.
The respondent applicant Deputy Collector and Magistrate
under the control of DM & Collector, North Tripura,
Dharmanagar submitted one application under Section 5(3) of
TPID Act praying for making the order of attachment of
Page 6 of 14
property of the present appellant and also to allow the prayer
of the petitioner appellant herein for disposal of the assets
mentioned in the schedule of the application for equitable
distribution to the creditors/depositors. The crux issue leading
to the application was that a criminal case under Jirania PS
Case No.77/2012 under Section 420/406/120(B) of IPC and
also under relevant Section of TPID Act, 2000 was registered
against the said appellant company. The Superintendent of
Police, CID Tripura in reference to the aforesaid case Jirania PS
reported to D.M & Collector, North Tripura, Dharmanagar to
take proper measures for attachment of the immoveable
property of the said company located in the North Tripura
District. The details of the properties mentioned herein as
under:-
Name of Name of Khatian Hal plot Class of Area
T.K Revenue No. No. land (in
Mouja acre)
1 2 3 4 5 6
1390 Bhiti(nal) 0.16
1391 Nal 0.15
Uptakhali Radhapur 976 1392 Chara 0.53
1393 Dhepa(nal) 0.56
1394/3269 Nal 0.23
Total 1.63
09. After that D.M & Collector on receipt of the
information made an inquiry and came to know that the
appellant company has got some property within Dharmanagar
Page 7 of 14
Sub-division as mentioned above. Immediately D.M &
Collector, North Tripura send a proposal to the Director,
Institution of Finance, Agartala for attachment of the property.
After that the Government of Tripura under the relevant
provision of TPID Act issued a notification dated 19.07.2017
and attached the movable and immovable properties of the
said company all over the State of Tripura including the
aforesaid property as reflected above which was published in
the Extra-ordinary issue of the Tripura Gazette dated
24.07.2017.
10. The present respondent applicant made prayer to
the Court of Learned Special Judge for making the attachment
absolute and permission for disposal of the asset for the
purpose of equitable distribution to the creditors/depositors.
Before the Learned Special Court notice was issued upon the
OP. The OP appeared and contested the case by filing objection
denying the claim of the State-respondent and contended that
the proceeding was not maintainable. It was further submitted
that the investigation of the criminal case was still under
progress and in view of the pendency of criminal proceeding
the case before the Learned Special Judge was not
maintainable.
11. Upon the pleadings of the parties, Learned Special
Court framed the following issues :-
(i) Whether the suit is maintainable in its present
forms?
Page 8 of 14
(ii) Whether the petitioner is entitled to get an order
confirming the attachment order vide notification
No.F.12(16)(61)-DIF/DAFFODILS/2016/2051-53 dated
19-07-2017 and for permission to sale the attached
property or any part thereof as per section 5(3) of the
Tripura Protection of interests of Depositors(In
Financial Establishments) Act, 2000, along with
amendment Act, 2011?
(iii) Whether the suit/application is barred by
limitation?
(iv) Whether the Opposite Party Company is a financial
company?
(v) Whether the trial in connection with Jirania PS Case
No.77/2012 is still pending?
(vi) What other relief/relieves the petitioner is entitled
to?
To substantiate the issues the respondent petitioner
examined as PW-1 and relied upon some documents which
were marked as Exhibits.
12. On the other hand, the appellant as OP No.1
adduced himself as OPW-1 and submitted some documents
which were marked as Exhibits. Now for the sake of
convenience, I would like to refer herein below the names of
the witnesses of both the parties as well as the exhibited
documents which are as follows:-
Name of witnesses:-
PW-1 - Sri Dibyendu Das, D.M. & Collector, North
Tripura, Dharmanagar
OPW-1 - Md. Abu Sadeque Ishtiaque Ahmed Choudhury,
Managing Director, M/S. Daffodils Associate
Ltd.
Name of Exhibits:-
Exhibit-1(i) & 1(ii)- Copy of Extraordinary issue of
Tripura Gazzette dated 24.07.2017 in two sheets.
Exhibit-2 - Certified copy of printed FIR of Jirania PS
case No.2012 JRN 77 dated 24.09.2022.
Exhibit.3(i) to 3(xii)- Certified copy of the complaint
petition filed by Sri Prabir Ch. Datta.
Page 9 of 14
Exhibit.4(i) to 4(iii)- Certified copy of the letter dated
22.04.2017 to DM & Collector, North Tripura by SP
(CID).
Exhibit-5 - Letter dated 21-06-2017 by D.M & Collector,
North Tripura.
Exhibit-6 (i) to 6(iv) -Letter of SDM, Dharmanagar
dated 09.01.2014.
Exhibit-7(i) to 7(ii)- Letter dated 04.08.2017 of D.M &
Collector, North Tripura.
Exhibit.8(i) & 8(ii)-Certified copy of khatian no.976 of
Mouja & Teheshil-Radhapur.
Exhibit.9- Letter dated 20-09-2017 of SDM,
Dharmanagar.
Exhibit.10- Copy of newspaper Jugashankha dated
18.09.2019 of Silchar.
13. On the other hand, OP No.1 adduced himself as
witness and submitted his examination-in-chief by affidavit. He
also adduced certain documents which were marked as
Exhibits as follows:-
Exhibit.A- Certified copy of order dated 03-02-2024 by
Ld. Special Judge CBI, Agartala in case no.Special TPID
10 of 2018.
Exhibit.B- Certified copy of order dated 04-03-2024 by
Ld. Special Judge CBI, Agartala in case no.Special TPID
10 of 2018.
Exhibit.C- Certified copy of the report submitted by CBI.
14. Finally, on conclusion of the proceeding Learned
Special Judge (TPID), North Tripura, Dharmanagar allowed the
claim petition and disposed of the same by the judgment and
order dated 19.06.2024 the operative portion of the order runs
as follows:-
ORDER
"33. In the result the order of attachment issued
vide notification No.F.12(16)(61)-
DIF/DAFFODILS/2016/2051-53 dated 19-07-2017 of
the Government of Tripura is hereby made absolute in
respect to property in question.
34. The petitioner is hereby allowed to go for
disposal of such property and assets for equitable
distribution of the same to the depositors from whom
the Opposite Parties or their Financial Institution had
collected such money and failed to repay the same on
maturity as per agreed terms and conditions, however
subject to the following conditions-
(i) in case of sale of immovable property, same shall be
done by a public auction fixing some base value of such
properties and also after giving wide publicity of such
auction;
(ii) before going for such sale or other from of disposal,
the petitioner shall first ascertain the total dues payable
to the depositors, as far as possible and will try to
return the money of depositors from the cash amount
lying under attachment first.
(iii) after the dues payable to the depositors are
satisfied and after meeting all the ancillary expenses
already incurred or to be incurred for the entire process,
the rest undisposed property shall automatically be
released from such attachment and be returned to the
person(s)/institutions(s) entitled to it and for this
purpose, the disposal by way of public auction shall be
taken up phase wise and based on the actual
need/requirement.
(iv) needless to say, proper accounting should be
maintained for entire process.
With the above said directions, the Case stands
disposed of on contest.
Make necessary entry in the Trial Register and
CIS."
Challenging the judgment/order the appellant
company has preferred this appeal.
15. I have heard detailed argument of both the sides as
indicated above and perused the record of the Learned Court
below. As already stated to determine the case Learned Special
Court framed some issues and decided issue nos.(i) and (iii) in
favour of the respondent-applicant. Although the issue of delay
was raised before the Court but the Court of Learned Special
Judge by order dated 16.12.2019 in connection with Civil
Misc.21 of 2017 allowed the delay in lodging the application
and challenging that order the appellant company also
preferred CRP before this High Court and this High Court by
order dated 02.02.2021 in connection with CRP 8 of 2020
placed to uphold the order of the Learned Special Judge.
16. At the time of hearing, nothing could be submitted
by the appellant in respect of decision of the Learned Special
Court on those issues. Now regarding issue nos.(ii), (iv), (v)
and (vi) Learned Counsel for the appellant at the time of
hearing, submitted that although issue no.(v) was framed by
Learned Special Court but at the time of delivery of judgment
no decision was taken in this regard by the Learned Special
Judge. However, on perusal of the said judgment of the
Learned Special Judge it appears that Learned Special Judge at
the time of determination of issue nos.(ii), (iv), (v) and (vi) in
Para No.24 opined that the property description was mentioned
in the application by the respondent applicant which was within
the jurisdiction of the Learned Trial Court and the said property
was purchased by the company i.e. the appellant herein was
not in dispute. It was also not disputed that the said company
after collecting money from the depositors purchased the
property left those properties and the State-Government under
TPID Act is empowered to attach the property of such financial
institutions which commenced default in repayment of money
to the depositors by applying fraud.
It was also observed that the State was empowered
to keep such property attached subject to the approval of the
designated Court. The OP took the plea that Jirania PS Case
No.77 of 2012 under Section 420/406/120(B) of IPC was
pending which was being investigated by CBI. On the ground
the pendency of criminal proceeding the appellant challenged
the maintainability of the proceeding before the Learned
Special Judge. It was further submitted that the appellant as
OP to substantiate their claim relied upon Exhibits-A, B, C and
those documents were relating to CBI criminal case.
It was the observation of the Learned Trial Court
that the property was purchased by the company using the
deposits of the consumers which the company collected from
different people on assurance of higher returns which they
ultimately failed to fulfill and the present appellant as OP also
failed to adduce any document to substantiate that the
property in dispute was legally procured by them. It was also
observation of the Learned Special Judge that the result of the
investigation in criminal case is no bar in civil proceeding
because civil proceeding and criminal case are based on
evidence on record. Even if it is found that the accused is
acquitted in criminal case still it cannot absolved him from the
civil liability. The appellant before the Learned Special Judge
also could not produce any proof and document to substantiate
that they were given due permission by the State to run their
business. The appellant also submitted that SEBI and RBI gave
clearance to the company but nothing was produced before the
Learned Special Court in this regard. So, finally after
discussions Learned Special Judge decided all the issues
against the present appellant and allowed the application filed
by the respondent applicant. The citations as referred by
Learned Counsel for the present appellant does not fit with the
present case as such the same cannot be applied in this case.
Even the judgment of the Division Bench of this High Court
relied upon by Learned Advocate General on behalf of the
respondent also in toto does not match the respondents case.
However, certain direction is given in the said judgment but
here in the case at hand Learned Special Judge at the time of
delivery of the judgment has given specific findings and before
this Court also Learned Advocate General did not pray for any
separate observation for modifying the earlier order on behalf
of the said respondent and as such, in view of the observation
of the Division Bench of this High Court, no separate order is
passed.
17. In the result, the appeal filed by the present
appellant stands dismissed being devoid of merit. The
judgment of the Learned Special Judge (TPID), North Tripura,
Dharmanagar dated 19.06.2024 in connection with Civil Misc.
No.21 of 2017 is hereby upheld and the same is affirmed
accordingly.
With this observation this appeal stands disposed of.
Send down the record to the Learned Special Judge
(TPID), North Tripura, Dharmanagar along with a copy of this
Judgment.
Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed
of.
JUDGE
Amrita
AMRITA DEB AMRITA DEB
Date: 2025.09.26 16:11:24
+05'30'
