Dismissed

V.K. Praveen Kumar v. State of Tn

Madras HC1 Mar 2021CMA/978/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This appeal challenged the Special Court's confirmation of attachment on the grounds that the appellant was an innocent bona fide purchaser. The High Court held that the Special Court identified the sale occurred during criminal proceedings and did not commit perversity. The appeal was dismissed, and the appellant was directed to file a fresh application for security. The impugned order remains co

What did the court decide?

The appeal was dismissed and the Fair and Decreetal order dated 17.03.2015 confirming the attachment was confirmed. The appellant is at liberty to file an application under Section 9 for security.

V.K. Praveen Kumar Vs State of Tn — Money Laundering | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 01.03.2021

¶2

CORAM

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

C.M.A.No.978 of 2015

and M.P.No.1 of 2015

V.K.Praveen Kumar

..Appellant

Vs.

1.State of Tamil Nadu, Rep.by Deputy Superintend of Police, Economic Offences Wing-II, Chennai – 40.

¶10

2.M/s.Senthil Financial Services No.40, Swarnambigai Nagar, Virugambakkam, Chennai – 92. Rep.by R.M.Mohan @ R.M.Mohun.

¶11

3.R.M.Mohan @ R.M.Mohun Son of Ramanathan No.40, Swarnambigai Nagar, Virugambakkam, Chennai – 92. ..Respondents

¶12

Prayer : Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 11 of the Tamil Nadu Protection of Interests of Depositors (In Financial Establishments Act), 1997, against the order dated 17.03.2015 passed in O.A.No.10 of 2013 on the file of the Special Judge under TNPID Act, 1997, Chennai – 104.

¶13

For Appellant : Mr.D.Ashok Kumar For Respondents : R1 – Mr.Dev Narendran Government Advocate(CS) R2 & R3 – Notice sent - Vacated J U D G M E N T

¶14

The Fair and Decreetal order dated 17.03.2015 passed in O.A.No.10 of 2013 is under challenge in the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.

¶15

The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant mainly contended that the appellant is the bonafide purchaser of the property through Sale Deed dated 02.07.2012 in Document No.3687/2012 from the 3^rd respondent. He was not https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ aware of the proceedings under the TNPID Act. The appellant

¶16

was an innocent purchaser, purchased for a valuable sale consideration. Thus, his rights are to be protected. Contrarily, the Special Court has not considered any of the nature of the transaction, which was genuine and rejected the application filed by the State to raise the attachment.

¶17

The first respondent / State filed an application to confirm the attachment under the provisions of the TNPID Act. In the said application, the appellant contested the issues mainly on the ground that he was an innocent buyer and his sale was no way connected with the financial transaction of the accused persons.

¶18

The Special Court adjudicated the issues with reference to the documents and evidences and arrived a conclusion that the sale was executed in favour of the appellant in Vide Document No.3687 of 2012 dated 02.07.2012. However, the respondent/Police registered F.I.R.No.3 of 2008 on 18.7.2008 under Section 420 of I.P.C and Section 5 of TNPID Act. The third respondent sent a representation on 13.11.2010 to the Inspector General of Police, Economic Offences Wing-II, Chennai for the attachment of five properties belonging to him, which excludes in mentioning the application mentioned property, which is the subject matter of the present appeal. On 10.10.2011, the 3^rd respondent has sent reminder notice to the Inspector General of Police, Economic Offences Wing-II, Chennai, for attachment of five properties belonging to him, excluding the property, which was transferred in the name of the appellant through Sale deed dated 02.07.2012. On 07.02.2012, the LIC Housing Finance Limited is having the charge over the property transferred in the name of the appellant, had returned the original document to the third respondent / owner of the property and the LIC had issued receipt for closing the loan account as against the third respondent caused on 16.02.2012. After releasing the said property from the LIC Housing Finance Limited, the third respondent executed a Sale Deed in favour of the appellant on 02.07.2012 vide Document No.3687 of 2012.

¶19

This being the facts and circumstances, the Special Court arrived a conclusion that the sale was executed during the pendency of the criminal case filed against the third respondent and therefore, the transaction between the appellant and the third respondent was shabby and doubtful. Taking note of all these facts, the Special Court confirmed the order of attachment passed by the competent authority.

¶20

This Court is of the considered opinion that it is an admitted fact that the Sale Deed in favour of the appellant was executed on 02.07.2012, during the pendency of the criminal case before the Economic Offences Wing-II, Chennai, in FIR.No.3/2008, more specifically, the sale was executed after a lapse of four years from the date of registration of https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ the criminal case. Therefore, the doubt raised by the Special

¶21

Court is merit acceptance and accordingly, the other aspects of the matter are to be adjudicated during the final hearing of the case before the Special Court.

¶22

If at all, the appellant has chosen to raise the attachment, he is at liberty to file an application under Section 9 of the TNPID Act, offering security in lieu of attachment to the satisfaction of the Special Court. As far as the merits of the case is concerned, there is no perversity or infirmity as such in respect of the order passed by the Special Court.

¶23

Thus, Fair and Decreetal order dated 17.03.2015 passed in O.A.No.10 of 2013 stands confirmed and consequently, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal in C.M.A.No.978 of 2015 is dismissed. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶24

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS IV)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
kak
To
The Special Judge under TNPID Act,
Chennai.
+1cc to Mr.D.Ashok kumar , Advocate SR.No. 13037
+1 cc to Government Pleader Sr.No. 12948

¶25

C.M.A.No.978 of 2015 gmi co A.SK(16.04.2021)

¶26

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

V.K. Praveen Kumar v. State of Tn

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V.K. Praveen Kumar v. State of Tn

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Deivathal Vs Sree Chitra Mills

R.Prema Vs Union of India, Rep by Its.

N. Safena Vs K. Abdul Munap

Bharath Kumar Vs S.Gayathri

Vijayalakshmi Vs Special Tahsildar

R.Kiruthiga Vs R.Parthasarathy