Kanjamally Mudali Trust vs State of Tamilnadu

Vinod K. Sharma, J.—The Petitioner-Kanchamally Mudali Charitable Trust has invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court, with the prayer

for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the Respondent herein to revalue the original 5000 star pagodas of the Petitioner

deposited with the Government of Tamilnadu, to the present day gold standard, and consequently pay the due interest at the prevailing bond rates

to the Petitioner.

The case of the Petitioner is that the Trust owned a vast extent of land in and around Tiruchirapalli Town. The Petitioner Trust was formed with

the benevolent motive of serving the public and in particular to serve the servant of the East India Company. The Petitioner in order to achieve the

object of the Trust deposited 2000 star pagodas (Gold coins weighing 3.4 Gms. Each) to the account of East India Company in Note No. 164 of

1796 - interest on Government security - 24G-6% perpetual loan-AEAB0007 yearly interest of 120 star pagodas. The Petitioner thereafter

deposited yet another 3000 star pagodas at a monthly interest of 20 star pagodas i.e. yearly interest of 240 star pagodas.

The Government, according to the Petitioner, had agreed to pay the above said interest of 6% and 8% per annum to the Trust as per the

arrangement.

The case of the Petitioner is that after the Independence, the payments was made in Indian Currency from the treasury of Trichirapalli to the

Petitioner Trust continuously. The case of the Petitioner is that, keeping in view of the change circumstances, the Petitioner sought the return of

original bonds vide letter dated 15.07.2000, but no reply was received from the Respondent. Aggrieved by the inaction of the Respondent, the

Petitioner filed W.P. No. 22761 of 2001 praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondents to return the original

bonds. The writ petition was disposed of.

The case of the Petitioner is that Government hold the securities deposited as perpetual loans. The details of securities is as under:

i) Note No. 164 of 1796 face value 2000 star Pagodas yielding a interest of 6 percent concerning perpetual Loan AEAB 0007 carrying 6%

Interest per annum.

ii) Note No. 164 of 1796 face value 3000 star Pagodas yielding a interest of 8 percent concerning perpetual Loan AEAA 0008 carrying a monthly

Interest of 8% per annum.

The case of the Petitioner is that against the security of gold the State of Tamil Nadu is only making a payment of interest at rate Rs. 420/- for

2000 star pagodas, and Rs. 840/- for 3000 star pagodas, totaling Rs. 1,260/- per annum.

The Petitioner did untiring labour to trace the relevant documents concerning the above said perpetual loans at British Library in London from

where he obtained the certified copies of the ledger maintained by the Queen''s Government in the Indian Imperative.

The Petitioner has also placed on record the document obtained from British Archives-London, for perusal of this Court, so as to appreciate the

nature of the loan, advanced by the Petitioner to East India Company and thereafter, to the Indian Government. The Petitioner claims that the

request was made to treat the loan as Gold deposit, but no reply has been received to the request of the Petitioner.

The case of the Petitioner, further, is that now the Respondent vide letter Ref. No. 34557/RO&M II/2008-I dated 05.07.2008 disclosed, that

the value of star pagoda was a unit worth of approximately 8 shilling and 3 1/2 rupees, and that the value of the principal deposit was valued at Rs.

7,000/- and Rs. 10,500/- deposit for the 2000 and 3000 star pagodas respectively. That the value was assessed according to the commercial

value and intrinsic built value.

It is not in dispute that the Petitioner is paid interest on the value disclosed. The value of the gold was converted into rupee in 1898 B.C. and

thereafter, the Petitioner accepted the interest on the said amount, the information by the Government factual position cannot be termed as

impugned order.

The value of the gold was converted into rupee in 1898, it is not open to the Petitioner, now to claim the recon version or to ask to revalue

after, lapse of more than 113 years. Even otherwise, the writ petition on the face of it, is not a competent as contractual loan, cannot be a subject

matter of the writ, in view of the law laid down by the Hon''ble Supreme Court in the case of Shalini Shyam Shetty and Anr. v. Rajendra Shankar

Patil 2011 I CTC 854.

The Writ Petition is dismissed on merit and also on the ground of competence. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petition is also dismissed.