N. Vanjimuthu vs Competent Authority & Commissioner of Land Administration, DRO

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2015 Supreme(Mad) 3366

D.HARIPARANTHAMAN
N. Vanjimuthu – Appellant
Versus
Competent Authority & Commissioner of Land Administration, DRO – Respondent

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For Appellant: Mr. R. Janakiramalu.
For Respondent: Mr. G. Muthukannan, Mr. R.J. Karthick, Mr. R. Subramanian, Mr. Veera Kathiravan, Mr. S. Parthasarathy and Mr. C. Joseph Santhianesan.

JUDGMENT :

D. HARIPARANTHAMAN, J.

1. This matter relates to unfortunate depositors whose deposits are not returned for more than 15 years.

2. The 2nd respondent/Ravi and Company Bankers, Dindigul, collected deposits from 1521 persons to the tune of Rs. 3,62,68,430/- before the year 2000. In spite of the deposits got matured, the depositors were not returned with money. Hence, about 528 complaints were sent by those depositors to various authorities.

3. Acting on the complaints, the Government issued G.O. Ms. No. 1362, Home (Courts IIA) Department, dated 18.12.2000, under Section 3 of the Tamil Nadu Protection of Interests of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 1997, (shortly, the Act) by making interim attachment of the properties and the money as per the schedule to the said G.O. At this juncture, it is useful to extract the schedule to G.O. Ms. No. 1362, Home (Courts IIA) Department, dated 18.12.2000.

THE SCHEDULE

DETAILS OF MONEY AND MOVABLE PROPERTIES

IMMOVABLE

Dindigul Town?

Survey No. 2572 to 257 (Total area 15,000 SQ.FT. Built up area 6000 Sq. ft.) - Hotel Swaga

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2015 Supreme(Mad) 3366

D.HARIPARANTHAMANN. Vanjimuthu – AppellantVersusCompetent Authority & Commissioner of Land Administration, DRO – Respondent

Cases Referred (11)

D.HARIPARANTHAMAN
N. Vanjimuthu – Appellant
Versus
Competent Authority & Commissioner of Land Administration, DRO – Respondent