This civil miscellaneous appeal has been filed under Section 11 of the Tamil Nadu Protection of Interest of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 1997 (in short TNPID Act, 1997) against the order dated 20.08.2010 made by the Special Judge under TNPID Act, Coimbatore in O.A.No.38 of 2008.

2. The financial establishment, whose properties were attached by the Government and the said attachment was made absolute by the above said order made in an application preferred by the Competent Authority is the appellant herein. The Competent Authority and the Inspector of Police, who investigated the offence allegedly committed by the appellant punishable under the provisions of the TNPID Act have been shown as Respondents 1 and 2 respectively.

3. On a miscellaneous petition filed by the appellant as M.P.No.1 of 2013 in this civil miscellaneous appeal praying for impleadment of the investors as other respondents in the appeal, this court passed an order impleading them as respondents 3 to 8. The third respondent Janarthanan is no more. The respondents 1 and 2 are represented by the Special Government Pleader (CS). Respondents 4 to 8 are represented by Mr.T.P.Manoharan.

4. The arguments advanced by Mr.R.Murali, learned counsel for the appellant, by Mr.V.Jayaram, learned Special Government Pleader (CS) representing the respondents 1 and 2 and by Mr.T.P.Manoharan, learned counsel for the respondents 4 to 8 are heard. The materials available on record are also perused.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant, without going into the merits of the appeal and expressing the appellant's readiness to make payment of the amounts due to the investors with interest as per the deposit receipts till the date of maturity and interest for the subsequent period at half of the rate of interest agreed to and incorporated in the deposit receipts wanted this court to show indulgence by releasing the properties attached by the Government, which attachment was made absolute by the impugned order of the Special Court under the TNPID Act. Learned Special Government Pleader (CS) appearing for the respondents 1 and 2, namely the Competent Authority and the Investigating Officer and the learned counsel for the respondents 4 to 8, namely some of the investors, expressed their unwillingness to accept the said offer for raising the attachment made in respect of the properties of the appellant. As the said offer made by the appellant was turned down, the learned counsel for the appellant has chosen to make his submissions supporting the challenge made to the impugned order of the TNPID Court dated 20.08.2010 made in O.A.No.38 of 2008.

6. Though the appellant has not raised a specific ground on the question of belatedness in filing the application under Section 4(3) of the TNPID Act, 1997, the learned counsel for the appellant sought the leave of the court to raise it as an additional ground. This court, acting on the oral application of the learned counsel for the appellant, permits the appellant to raise such a ground as one of the grounds challenging the order passed by the Special Judge under TNPID Act, 1997, Coimbatore.

7. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the order under Section 3 of the TNPID Act, 1997, came to be passed by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.572 Home (Courts-IIA) Department dated 26.04.2004, but the application under Section 4(3) came to be filed in December 2004, which was not at all processed for several years and that the failure to comply under section 4(3) of the Act to get an order making the attachment absolute shall nullify the order passed by the government under section 3 of the Act.

8. In this regard, learned Special Government Pleader is not in a position to give a clear picture as to when the application was filed and how the application was taken on file, even though it was not filed within 30 days as contemplated under section 4(3) of the Act. Learned Special Government Pleader has made an attempt to conten