TMI Blog2014 (6) TMI 1055X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the deposits collected from the depositors, in exercise of powers conferred under Section 3 of the TNPID Act, makes an ad-interim order of attachment of the movable and immovable properties and transfers the control of the same to the competent authority, the third respondent in the writ petition. Admittedly, the vehicles in question have not been disposed of by the competent authority and ad-interim attachment is yet to be made absolute and the application is stated to be pending - The challenge in the Criminal Revisions is to the orders passed by the Special Court dismissing the applications filed by the petitioner under Sections 451 457 Cr. P.C. The contentions raised by the petitioner and the objections made by the fourth respondent Police as well as the competent authority have been referred to in the preceding paragraphs. The Special Court after taking note of the submission made on either side referred to the Section 3 of the Act and held that the Government is having every power to attach the properties on financial establishment, who had defaulted in payment to the depositors and therefore, came to the conclusion that the petition filed by the petitioner is not mai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Section 5 of the TNPID Act in various crime numbers and the vehicles which were financed by the petitioner, were seized by the fourth respondent Police in connection with the said criminal cases. The petitioner would contend that they are the owner of the vehicles, as there is a hypothetication agreement between the petitioner and the purchaser and there is an endorsement in the registration certificate of all the vehicles, which reveal that the petitioner is the absolute owner of the vehicles and the fourth respondent Police has no jurisdiction to seize the vehicle. 6. The petitioner had earlier filed a writ petition before this Court in W.P. Nos. 7180, 7182 7186 of 2013, with a prayer for issuance of a direction upon the respondents 3 and 4 and the Revenue Divisional Officer, Erode as well as the borrowers to grant custody of the vehicles, whose registration numbers were furnished. 7. In the writ petition in W.P. No. 7180 of 2013, one of the borrower/accused Mrs. S. Indumathi had filed a counter affidavit stating that the order of attachment made, has been challenged before the Special Court in O.A. Nos. 27 and 28 of 2013, which are pending. It was further stated that du ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re are more than 1000 depositors and the amount defaulted is about ₹ 27 crores and the Government had passed an order dated 12.07.2013, ordering attachment of the vehicles and other immovable properties owned by the accused and that investigation revealed that the accused diverted the deposited amount for the purchase of the vehicles and therefore, the vehicles were seized by the Investigating Officer after recording the statement of the accused and that the District Revenue Officer, Erode, has taking steps to move the Special Court for making the order of interim attachment as absolute. Similar stand was taken by the competent authority under the TNPID, who was also arrayed as respondent in the said petitions. The accused/borrowers did not file any counter. The Special Court by separate orders dated 07.01.2014, dismissed the petitions filed by the petitioner holding that the petitioner was only a financial establishment, who lent money for purchasing the vehicles and in terms of Section 3 of the TNPID Act, the Government has power to attach the property of a financial establishment, who had defaulted the depositors for payment of the amount collected by the establishment fro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issue involved in both the Writ Petitions as well as the Criminal Revision Cases are inter-linked, this Court would proceed to first consider the prayer sought for in the writ petition. 14. The writ petition has been filed to quash the Government Order in G.O. Ms. No. 178, dated 19.03.2013. The Government took note of the fact that the complaints were received from the depositors of the respondent company stating that they have defaulted in return of the deposits made by the depositors after maturity and the Government is satisfied that the financial establishments is not likely to return the deposits to the depositors and the Government have to protect the interest of such depositors and therefore, the movable and immovable properties alleged to have been procured by the financial establishments from and out of the deposits collected from the depositors, in exercise of powers conferred under Section 3 of the TNPID Act, makes an ad-interim order of attachment of the movable and immovable properties and transfers the control of the same to the competent authority, the third respondent in the writ petition. Further direction has been issued to the third respondent to pursue action ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he deposits made by public in financial establishment and when several complaints have been received by the Government from the depositors regarding the non-return of the deposits, the Government can attach the properties of such establishments. Therefore, the petitioner cannot be said to have been aggrieved by the order of ad-interim attachment. 18. Admittedly, the vehicles in question have not been disposed of by the competent authority and ad-interim attachment is yet to be made absolute and the application is stated to be pending. 19. The private respondent/accused are also said to have challenged the order of attachment by filing O.A. Nos. 27 28 of 2013, which were pending, when the earlier writ petitions filed by writ petitioner was heard. In such circumstances, the question of quashing the impugned order does not arise. Accordingly, the prayer sought for in the writ petition to quash G.O. Ms. No. 178, dated 19.03.2013, stands rejected. The petitioner has sought for a further direction in the writ petition to return the vehicles, this prayer has become infructuous in the light of the fact that the petitioner moved the Special Court and the Special Court has passed an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Special Court, claiming interim custody of the vehicles under Section 451 Cr. P.C. and there was a direction to the Special Court to dispose of the said application within a time frame. Therefore, the proper procedure that should have been adopted is by adjudicating the rights of the petitioner to seek for interim attachment. While doing so, the Court was bound to examine the right, which the petitioner possesses under the deed of hypothetication vis- -vis the right of the borrowers/accused coupled with the fact that the vehicle in question is an order of interim attachment passed under the TNPID Act, which is a Special Act intended to protect the interest of the depositors, who have been defrauded by financial establishment. However, the Special Court has not addressed this issue. 22. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Anup Sharmah vs. Bhola Nath Sharma Ors., reported in (2013) 1 SCC 400, was considering the correctness of a decision of the High Court of Gauhati in a Criminal Revision case rejecting the case of the petitioner against the respondent therein that they had forcibly taken custody of the vehicle purchased by the petitioner therein on hire purchase fro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
