Back
2015 Supreme(Mad) 3366
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
D. HARIPARANTHAMAN, J.
N. Vanjimuthu – Appellant
Vs.
Competent Authority & Commissioner of Land Administration, DRO – Respondent
C.M.A. (MD) No. 807 of 2014 and M.P. (MD) Nos. 1 & 3 of 2014
Decided On : 15.12.2015
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.
Headnote:Tamil Nadu Protection of Interests of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 1997, Sections 3 and 4 - Rule 7- The present appeal for being a bonafide purchaser against the depositors not valid-If any of such claims than in the civil court against financial establishments- Appellant purchased property on which interim injunction was there he cannot plea for any of hindrances due to injunction claiming to be a innocent purchaser - Appeal dismiss.
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 Swagath
MONEY
| S. No. | A/C in the name of the Account holder | Name of the Bank | Account Number | Amount |
| 1 | Ravichandran | 1. City Union Bank, Dindigul.
2. T.M.B. Dindigul | C A/C 1424
Sc A/C. 181960
| 1457/-
133/- |
| 2 | S.M. Muthaiyar | City Union Bank, Dindigul | A/C. 1281 | 1196/-
|
| 3 | Hotel Swagath | 1. City Union Bank
2. TMB Dindigul
| C A/C. 1240
C A/C. 311575 | 813.87
730.7 |
| 4 | Ganesh | City Union Bank Dindigul | SB 4984
CA 1499 | 2592/- 682 |
| 5 | Ramesh | City Union Bank Dindigul | SC 4985
| 2635/- |
SANTHA SHEELA NAIR
SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
4. It could be seen from the aforesaid schedule that the attached Hotel Swagath is having the built up area measuring 6000 sq. ft in Dindigul Town in the total area of 15,000 sq. ft. The interim attachment was made in the interest of the depositors. The aforesaid properties were purchased from the deposits of the depositors.
5. According to the appellant herein, even before the interim attachment made in the year 2000, the financial establishment (hereinafter referred to as respondents 2 to 6) entered into a lease with him for running the Hotel Swagath. He admits in his counter affidavit filed before the TNPID Court, more particularly, paragraph 3 that the respondents 2 to 6 herein informed him about the complaints preferred by the depositors against the Bankers for not returning the deposits. Hence, on their request, the appellant herein surrendered possession of the Hotel Swagath to them in December 2000. According to the appellant, in July 2001, the respondents 2 to 6 approached him once again to run the Hotel Swagath on lease basis. The said affidavit proceeds that the respondents 2 to 6 went on pestering him unabatedly to purchase the property, as many depositors approached the court of law and obtained decrees against them in various courts of law, besides initiating criminal proceedings.
6. It is also averred that with a view to emancipate the respondents 2 to 6 from the financial distress, the appellant purchased the Hotel Swagath by means of a registered sale deed dated 11.08.2003 for a valuable consideration from them.
7. Before the petitioner purchased the property by way of a sale deed dated 11.08.2003 as stated above, one of the partners of M/s. Hotel Swagath filed W.P. No. 5342 of 2001 before the Principal Seat, seeking to quash the aforesaid G.O. Ms. No. 1362, Home (Courts IIA) Department, dated 18.12.2000 issued under Section 3 of the Act, making interim attachment. The said W.P. No. 5342 of 2001 was disposed of with some directions on 02.07.2001.
8. This Court without deciding any issues, left all the issues to be decided by the Special Court constituted under the Act, however, directed the District Collector and the Revenue
