A.Gopalakrishnan, v. The State Rep By Its Secretary

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 22.03.2016

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.MANIKUMAR and THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.SELVAM W.A.(MD)No.439 of 2016 and CMP.(MD)No.3126 of 2016 in W.P.(MD)No.11424 of 2005 A.Gopalakrishnan .. Appellant Vs.

1.The State Rep. by its Secretary Home (Courts III A) Department, Government of Tamilnadu, Fort St.George, Chennai - 9.

2.The Tahsildhar, Madurai North Taluk, Madurai - 625 020.

.. Respondents PRAYER: The Writ Appeal is filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent against the order of this Court, dated 29.09.2008 in W.P.(MD) No.11424 of 2005.

Prayer in WP(MD). 11424/ 2005 :

Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance a writ of Certiorari,calling for the records of the proceedings in G.O.M.S.No. 569 Home (Courts IIIA) Department dated 18/06/2001 on the file of thke 1st respondendt and quashs the same as illegal in so for as the petitioner is concerned.

For Appellants : Mr.G.Thiruvarutselvan For Respondents : Mr.C.Selvaraj Special Government Pleader

JUDGMENT

(Judgment of this Court was delivered by S.MANIKUMAR, J.) When G.O.Ms.No.569, Home (Courts III -A) Department, dated 18.06.2001 was tested in a batch of writ petitions in W.P.(MD) No.11119 of 2005 etc., vide order, dated 29.09.2008, the writ Court has passed the following order:- "The attack in these writ petitions is to the proceedings in G.O.Ms.No.569, Home (Courts IIIA) Department, dated 18.06.2001, wherein certain properties

of the financial establishment in the name and style of M/s.K.L.K. And K.R.S. Small Savings and Chits, No.22, Lakshmipuram II Street, Madurai was attached under Section 3 of the Tamil Nadu Protection of Interests of Depositors (in Financial Establishments) Act, 1997. The annexure to the said order sets out the list of properties which is allegedly owned or purchased by the said financial institution.

2.The challenge in these writ petitions as seen from the affidavits is that there was no application of mind by the competent authority and the properties which are not necessarily connected to the financial institution have been added and no notice was given before passing the order of attachment by the State Government.

3.All these arguments have been rejected by the Full Bench of this Court in BAGAVATHY, S. Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU reported in 2007 (2) CTC 207 to which I am a member (K.CHANDRU, J.). In the said Judgment, it has been held that there is no necessity to grant any notice before attachment as the very purpose of the action will be defected if such notice is given before the attachment. Even C.P.C. Contemplates exparte attachment before Judgment. The Full Bench also held specifically that the petitioners can move the Special Court for raising the attachment and convince the Court in terms of the Act. Therefore, the argument relating to violation on principles of natural justice cannot be countenanced by this Court.

4.With reference to third party properties, the Court has also held that the aggrieved party can move the Special Court to seek for removal of their properties from the attachment after convincing the Special Court. Because the Act provides to include any other property which has been purchased by the funds diverted from the financial institution. It is for that Court to decide whether such funds were used in respect of the purchase of the said property. There is no case made out in these writ petitions. Accordingly, these writ petitions stand dismissed. No costs. Consequently connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed." 2.Though the instant appeal has been filed testing the correctness of the common order, we find no error in the same. Section 7(3) of the Tamil Nadu Protection of Interests of Depositors (in Financial Establishments) Act, 1997, also provides for a remedy to the appellant. Section 7(3) of the said Act reads as follows:- (3)Any person claiming an interest in the property attached or any portion thereof may, notwithstanding that no notice has been served upon

him under this section, make an objection as aforesaid to the Special Court at any time before an order is passed under sub-section (4) or sub-section (6).

3.In view of the above, we find no merit in the writ appeal and hence, the same is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is also dismissed. Sd/ Assistant Registrar (RTI) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Secretary, Home (Courts III A) Department, Government of Tamilnadu, Fort St.George, Chennai - 9.

2.The Tahsildhar, Madurai North Taluk, Madurai - 625 020.

+1cc to Special Government Pleader in Sr.No.16760 CN/AN-MP/5.4.2016/3P-4C W.A.(MD)No.439 of 2016 and CMP.(MD)No.3126 of 2016 in W.P.(MD)No.11424 of 2005 22.03.2016