ORDER:-As both the above cases arise out of the same proceedings and involve identical issues, they arc dealt with together.

2. An enquiry into the constitution, working and financing ondition of the Tenkasi Co-operative Urban Bank Limited, hereinafter referred to as the bank, was ordered under section 65 of the Madras Co-operative Societies Act, 1961. by the Deputy Registrar, Tirunelveli in his proceedings, dated 22nd November, 1965. A preliminary report of the enquiry officer was submitted on !9th July, 1966 and it showed that there had been misappropriation of the bank’s funds. As a follow-up of the said report the Deputy Registrar issued surcharge notices, dated 6th August, 1966, under section 71 of the Act to one M. Chockalingam Pillai the ex-President, and N.T. Pannayar, the ex-Vice-President, and 8 others who were ex-directors of the bank. A surcharge notice was also issued to one R. Ulaganathan, ex-clerk of the bank who was alleged to have misappropriated the funds of the bank. At that stage the bank was superseded and a Special Officer was appointed under section 72 of the Act by an order of the Joint Registrar, dated 10th September, 1966 In answer to the above surcharge notices issued to them, the ex-directors represented that the enquiry officer had sent only a preliminary report, and that surcharge proceedings could be initiated only after a complete and full report of the enquiry is received. In view of this objection, a reviled surcharge notice was issued on 12th December, 1966, after receipt of a complete and full report of enquiry on 29th October, 1965, in modification of the earlier surcharge notice, dated 6th August, 1966. In the surcharge proceedings following the said revised notice, dated 12th December, 1966, it was found that an amount of Rs. 27,519-13 has been misappropriated during the period from 15th January, 1948 to 23rd August, 1966, out of which a sum of Rs. 1,000 was made good by the said Ulaganathan, ex-clerk. However, in view of section 1(1) which bars recovery of any amount by way of surcharge after a period of six years from the date of any act or omission, the amount misappropriated within six years prior to the notice of surcharge was alone taken into account. The result was the second surcharge notice related only to a sum of Rs. 12,718 referable to the period covering six years preceding the surcharge notice. By his final order dated 19th August, 1967 a surcharge order has been passed against the ex-clerk as well as the ex-President, ex-Vice-President and the ex-directors holding them jointly, and severally liable for the said sum of Rs. 12,718 found to have been misappropriated from the bank’s funds.

3. Chockalingam Pillai, the ex-President of the Bank and N. T. Pannayar, the ex-Vice-President of the bank, having died pending the surcharge proceedings, their legal representatives filed appeals before the Co-operative Tribunal, Tirunelveli (District Judge, Tirunelveli). The said appeals have been dismissed on 13th December, 1971. The legal representatives of Chockalingam Pillai, ex-President of the bank have challenged the said decision of the Co-operative Tribunal in the civil revision petition. The legal representatives of the ex-Vice-President, N. T. Pannayar has filed the writ petition questioning the order of the Co-operative Tribunal.

4. The findings of the enquiry officer on the basis of which the surcharge order has been passed against the ex-clerk and ex-directors is that the entire amount covering items 25 to 40, had been misappropriated by the ex-clerk, that he had also been convicted in a criminal Court for misappropriation of the bank’s funds, and that the President and Vice-President and ex-Directors are liable to be surcharged for their carelessness and negligence. The Co-operative Tribunal refers to the evidence of Ulaganathan, ex-clerk who had deposed that he was the only clerk of the bank from 6th June, 1939 to 17th December, 1965, that he was in sole charge of the accounts

Click Here to Read the rest of this document