P.Shanmugam v. The District Revenue Officer
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 27-04-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.KUMARESH BABU CMA No. 1383 of 2010 & Criminal Appeal No. 86 of 2016 CMA No. 1383 of 2010:- P.Shanmugam S/o Palaniappa Chettiar ..Appellant Vs
1. The District Revenue Officer, Competent Authority Cum District Revenue Officer, Coimbatore.
2. P.Shanmuga Finance Company D.No.174, No.1, Thiyagaraja New Street, Coimbatore 641 001.
3. Logambal W/o.P.Shanmugam
4. Sampoornammal (Died) W/o.Palaniappa Chettiar
5. P.Vadivel S/o.Palaniappa Chettiar
6. R.Kandasamy S/o.Marimuthu Chettiar
7. A.Gnanambal W/o.Arunachalam
8. P.Leelavathi W/o.Prabhu
9. Balasubramaniam S/o.Lingapa Gounder 10.C.Maragatha, W/o.M.Kannapiran R7 & R8 brought on record as LRs of deceased fourth respondent.
R9 & R10 impleaded as party respondents vide order of Court dt 18/2/2014 made in M.P.No.1/2013 in C.M.A.No.1383/2010 ..Respondents Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 11 of TNPID Act praying to set aside the order dated 12-05-2010 passed in O.A.No.36/2008 on the file of TNPID Court, Coimbatore.
For Appellant :
Mr.Ma.P.Thangavel For Respondents :
Mr.N.Muthuvel Government Advocate [R1] Not ready in notice [R2, R5 & R7] No appearance [R3, R6 & R8] Died [R4] Mr.P.Tamilavel [R9 & R10] Criminal Appeal No. 86 of 2016:-
1. Shanmugam Finance rep. by P.Shanmugam
2. P.Shanmugam
3. S.Logambal ... Appellants/Accused 1 to 3 Vs.
The State rep. by The Inspector of Police, BOW II, Coimbatore.
... Respondent/Complainant P.Vadivel S/o. (Late) Palaniappa Chettiar M.Kanthasamy (Late) Marimuthu ... Respondents/Accused 5 and 6 Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code praying to set aside the order of the learned Special Judge, TNPID Court, Coimbatore, dated 16.07.2015 in CC No.52/2008 and allow this appeal. For Appellants :
Mr.Ma.P.Thangavel For Respondents:
Mr.R.Venkatesa Perumal, Government Advocate (Crl. Side) (R1) C O M M O N J U D G M E N T This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal had been filed challenging the order of attachment that had been made of the properties belonging to the appellant, who was charged with the offences under the Tamil Nadu Protection of Interests of Depositors (in Financial Establishments) Act, 1997.
2. The appellant had also been convicted for the said offences and have been handed with a punishment of 2 years imprisonment of which he had already undergone a year. Against which, he had preferred the Criminal Appeal, which was also directed to be taken up along with CMA. Pending these appeals, pursuant to the interim orders passed by this Court, the appellant had deposited
a sum of Rs.24,46,000/- which include the principal and interest as noted by the learned Special Court under TNPID Act, Coimbatore. Seven persons have complained against the appellant for his failure to repay the amounts deposited by them on the promise to repay with higher rate of interest. It is to be noted that some of the complainants had died and in respect of the complainants, 7 of the legal heirs were shown as witnesses with regard to the Fixed Deposit Receipts issued by the appellant together with the amount deposited and the interest that they were entitled to. The following are the witnesses against whose name the amount was deposited and as against each of them, the total amount received by each of them were given:- S.No.
List of witnesses Amount Rs.
Interest Rs.
Total Rs.
1.
Krishnaraj K.Pushpalatha 100000 100000 36000 36000 136000 136000 2.
L.Balasubramanian 300000 108000 408000 3.
N.Devarajan 150000 72000 222000 4.
Maragatha Kannabiran 200000 400000 48000 192000 248000 592000 5.
R.S.Mani 250000 90000 340000 6.
C.Venkatesan 200000 96000 296000 7.
P.Santhanakrishnan 50000 18000 68000 Total 1750000 696000 2446000
3. In view of the fact that the amounts that were due and payable by the appellant had been deposited into the Court as per the orders of the Court and such amount on deposit with accrued interest stand at Rs.24,82,016/- as on 22.04.2026, the entire amount of deposit made by the depositors had stood
recovered pursuant to the orders of this Court. In such view of the matter, this Court is of the view that the attachment of the properties that is subject matter of challenge in the present CMA need not be continued and the orders of the attachment can be raised.
4. In the trial, the second and third appellants in Criminal Appeal had been convicted and had been imposed with the sentence to undergo two years of rigorous imprisonment plus Rs.5,000/- fine for each of the count and the said imprisonment was to run concurrently. The first appellant in Criminal Appeal was directed to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-. It is to be noted that the fine amount that had been ordered by the Trial Court, had been paid and taking note of the same, the sentence was also suspended by the Trial Court in its order dated 12.08.2015. They had also suffered incarceration during the period of investigation and trial.
5. Taking into consideration that the appellant have deposited the entire deposit amount together with interest as tabulated above, pursuant to the orders of this Court, this Court is of the view that a lenient punishment could be imposed on the second and third appellants who were responsible for the offence that they had committed. Further taking into the age of the appellants, this Court modifies the punishment that had been imposed on them to the imprisonment that they had already suffered.
6. For the aforesaid reasons, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal stands disposed of raising the order of attachment and the Criminal Appeal is partly allowed modifying the punishment as indicated above. No order as to costs. 27-04-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Maya
To
1. The District Revenue Officer Competent Authority Cum District Revenue Officer, Coimbatore.
2. The Special Court under TANPID Act, Coimbatore.
K.KUMARESH BABU, J.
Maya CMA No. 1383 of 2010 and Criminal Appeal No. 86 of 2016 Dated : 27-04-2026