##PAGE1##

REV.APPL No. 144 of 2021

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 30-01-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI

REV.APPL No. 144 of 2021

AND

CMA No. 1059 of 2015

S.Jayaraman

S/o. Sellamuthu, Pooncholai, Annamangalam Post,

Veppanthattai Tk, Perambalur Dist , Tn.

..Petitioner(s)

Vs

1.Deputy Superintendent Of Police

Economic Offenses Wing-ii, Tiruchirapalli Dist,

2.Future Forex India Pvt Ltd

Kannan Complex , Periyar Salai, Chennai Road,

Perambalur - 621 212

3.Future India City Development And Builders Pvt

Ltd,

Kannan Complex, Periyar Salai, Chennai Road,

Perambalur - 621 212

4.Sivakumar

S/o. Kandasamy, No.335, Muthu Nagar, West,

2nd Cross Road, Elambalur Road, Perambalur -

621 212

__________

Page1 of 8

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/02/2026 12:10:43 pm )

REV.APPL No. 144 of 2021

..Respondent(s)

CMA No. 1059 of 2015

Jayaraman

S/o Chellamuthu Annamangalam Pooncholai,

Veppanthattai., Perambalur

..Appellant(s)

Vs

1.Deputy Superintendent Of

Police Economic Offences Wing Ii Tiruchirapalli

District

2.Future Forex India Private

Limited Kannan Complex, Periyar Salai,

Chennai Road, Perambalur 621 212

3.Future India City

Developmnet And Builders Pvt Ltd Kannan

Complex Periyar Salai Chennai Road,

Perambalur 621 212

4.Shivakumar

S/o Kandasamy No. 335, Muthunagar West,

2nd Cross Road Elambalur Road, Perambalalur

..Respondent(s)

__________

Page2 of 8

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/02/2026 12:10:43 pm )

REV.APPL No. 144 of 2021

REV.APPL No. 144 of 2021

To review the order dated on 29/03/2021 in the

CMA.No.1059/2015.

For Petitioner(s): Mr.V.C.Janardhanan For Mr.A.Vijaya Kannan

For Respondent(s): Mr. C. Sathish Govt. Advocate

For R1

Mr. M. Selvam For R2 To 4

ORDER

This Review Application has been filed to review the Judgment delivered

in CMA No.1059 of 2015.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that at the time of

the arguments in C.M.A No.1059 of 2015, the petitioner's counsel has not

submitted the notification dated 29.02.2012 published in the Tamil Nadu

Government Gazette with regard to attachment of the property belongs to the

accused concerned. He recently, came to know that in the said Government

Notification dated 29.02.2012, the property which was purchased by the

petitioner pertaining to S.No.262/1A was not listed in the Schedule of an ad-

interim attachment order. Vide Government Notification dated 29.02.2012 in

page No.142. While the specific property was not legally attached, the Trial

Court without considering the same, ordered to attach the property purchased by

the petitioner from the accused K.Sivakumar. vide order dated 22.08.2014.

__________

Page3 of 8

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/02/2026 12:10:43 pm )

REV.APPL No. 144 of 2021

Challenging the aforesaid attachment order of the Trial Court, the petitioner

filed C.M.A. No.1059 of 2015 before this Court. This Court by Judgment dated

29.03.2021, confirmed the order of attachment of the Trial Court after hearing

both sides. During the arguments before this Court, the petitioner's counsel

failed to bring to the notice of this Court about the said Government notification

wherein the petitioner’s property was not listed while the properties of the

accused concerned have already been attached by the 1^st respondent, the

confirmation of attachment of the Trial Court made by this Court is erroneous.

Therefore he seeks to review the order of the Trial Court and allow the C.M.A.

No.1059 of 2015 relying upon the Government Notification dated 29.02.2012.

3. The learned counsel for the Government Pleader would submit that by

influencing the deposit amount, the Accused K.Sivakumar, purchased the

property situated at Perambalur District, on 09.02.2011 and sold the same to the

petitioner herein with a malafide intention, on the same day to avoid the

attachment of the property. After considering the said malafide transaction, the

petitioner was added as the 4^rd respondent in O.A.No.6 of 2013 filed by the 1^st

respondent under Section 8 of the Tamil Nadu Prote