B.eithya (limplescte dated 16. epl.0. BH varene Grow f Seputy rime eran: Alesdue, & peritionsr/ cgpound the tie tha entice ca: sor Petitioners 2 HY.R.Smnmigosundaram, senior for Ne.N.chandrasekaran Eo rhe pe cpoliten Max aggeievad claimants/aienscass to ang pees any suiteble order to Enterprises fnelia fieaces e ion te end Honey SAA R979 39G-It iu inforven that the patinioner is ti of QueetWet Baterprises Cadia Pvt. ped. hovin yr: icholaz Read, Chetpet, Chennal, tbat ite off, na Managing eet MO the Compssy was peiginally etavtad in tha yaee 2004 and nature cf business ae thot, & silver medellicns, jewellery, watel the Company promotee swle of producte through ite aeuwork mareubing and that if a cus Bell products to new customers for which commission amcunt dalivered from the sale of product. 4.nt ie submi any customer with ineereat could buy the products ranging frow ¢ to vecotion packas emg tomer: comer is interested ha or Re of she would ted that the susiness plan of the Company ee, that slates thet only the requasted acticies vill hw given initially ¢ tha customers and further if the customers enhance the business on their ewa, they vill cegularly get commission. tt Eucther sobmiteed that tha cples and regulations were iucid and cnly ster nper meting of winds the cue a Company, thet onca the ‘ay and are authorised to cerry on introducing mars antered inte age: customers entar into agreement with rhe they becoss indepancent repeereatatiras of the Coupany. buslanes plan of the company is availebls in its wes Rey customer who later ventures to bacone as tive Ss also uppeaisad of the business picr given due training ia this eagard. 3. It is eubmitted that ia the year 2001 the Dusiness Kqewt International Bet. wae dealing waz ng uinted exclusively for the company in Germany. selling was initially atartad by Gold and at that time the only product the compa: Medallio Be standards of purit Gola medaiiions gackarad by the there waz @ heavy eush for Gold medallions sald by the compeny. The annua? cusinass campans the audited account of coupany is evidant fr the suc register: s6 of Goldguast. ‘this & sural city en the shove complaint int Beanch (CCB) Cr.o.60 of 2002 for slleged oftence Uadar y investigated by the T.B.c. R/w S11 T.P.0. he cago waz rhorough a5 been filed. The volume uf the business done by Gold attracting the avil eyes of othar business men who become 5 c ulead in Elling @ enlee comaiat eae wi St Coldquest by instigating a customer at Madurai. Central Ceiwe a Inspector attacked te the Central Crise Branch (CCE) Macarai sold ey the company wal Appraisers, wo after testing the gold certitie of high paucity aed worth the value peid in mew: Magucai Tiled 9 Final Re: cowmittad by the comany, and refs nig final cepert wae s¢rutinised and sccepted by Gudicial Magistrate No.J, Maducai Order accepting the final report and closing the cone Fact in AC2.No.281 of 2002 on 99.07.2002 ye Baa xt stating thet thave wes ced the cas as Migtake af Fact. he court passed Et is gubnitred that even the quality sf che Gold Meda: analysad by the Governnent ‘che the ent ehh fe, that oh ands paride eet a1 ion 4 wity. dons appesvest a wen cheating ZaavnedB,tt 1 gybmitred cha anovner coupteine 5 awe ablagations wes filed in Chennai on 10.03.2003 and registered cheanai city Cental Crime Branch Gr.vo.307 ag directed by this Hoa'ble court in W.P.26874/2003, the came forward to aattle the claims of all the customers xhn had not Facaived theic products, The Advocate Commissioner appointet by this Hon'ble Couzt filed a detailed report in August 2005. The said ceport would state the natura of elaine end the sattlenents made the third time a similar allagation is made against roby filing recent cases. ‘Tha petitioner any hee nd #iiling to settle the claims of tha present case in f-1 Sambius Cewe.454 of 2002 and other casas being jointly invasticatad by 3% respondent /Oy.8.P.CECIN against the petitions: company in the vecent cuses ss It was done in 2003 canae.” 09.04.2009 da Grl.0.P.¥e. 1829/09 to direct the cesgcndant police to in Grime we.984/2008, CRCED, Matro wat, withis a pacits of three months from the date of order. emt has now been filed in hig matter and the som ra the Chie€ nt2, Hgine 009. othr cases. In the absva ciremstances, tha petition Fatition on 68.07.2003 befere tne learned IF mete: Magistrate, Sgmore, Chennai seeking permission to compound the allegad offences by eattling the reasonable and lawful claing of the customers, Eut the court was plenead to return t oti tion sunmimbered on 13.07.2009 stating thet the petition ts prasature. UL.Intorming that the respondent proposes to exanine 32011 cugtemers of the company es prosccution witnesses ducing the trial and that the process of trial would be protracted for atleast = decade. The petitioner expresues willingness to settle the aves Paysble to the complainants and the claimants. Tt is in such Chrownstencos thet = Siraction ts sought fror this court ta me Lower court ‘te permit the patitioner ond the eggrieved claimants tu cowpound the case. “By vay M.B.No.t and Z of 2009 in Griminel originai Petition no.22942/09, The petitivaers therein have sought to be impieaded in the main criminal origiaal petition and thay state that kmsy have praferrad complaints against the company snd ara #illin Loc amicable settlenant therewith. | fhe said petitions for impleading wave allowed today. I3.The petitioner in M.P.1/09 has come with = list of 23 Feraong and the patitioner in H.P.2/09 has toma with a list of Loz pecsenas wha ara willing pound snd ouicably settle their Gispute with the company t have heard the Sener couasel Mr. R.Skunmigacundacam, appearing for H/s.N.Chandrasakacen, learned Govecamant Advocate. Several othe counsel appeaciny on bahalf of pe also nave Bes n Roaed. : sens vho have prafercad cowplainta sqainst the.cahaa 7 9 45af the subiiszions made before this court is eh ‘vo yaea the patitiorerfaccused who is willing to ee roe Utious claine sede against tha company and on the Oth sete ea thous whe have put 10 theix haxcl earned woniss in the passe he compa’ Guagtet Bntarprises India Pvt. Ltd, end tie daeire of Suc ip peimarily to have their money back. is.tn the circumstances of the case, this covet is of the vier thot ina nrerents of qnatice would bast to be secved by directs ng lewer court to parait compound: eouplaiars batysea the wpary acd tha claivente a4 and when rhe Caquant thereof Ae for my horh parties, As the cana is Wpiainte, it becones necessary to state thet see on such of the couplaints sz ave compounded, ecution shell pri paete Reqsoteae Ql asslyy te sup Astte Registrae x0 Lethe 11 Mateaphitan waghztrnta Geucte 2,266 the oputy Superintendent of Peikce *Enine Branen cob, Tatee Unit 3.the Public Prosecutor, Wigh Court, Chennai. 4 2 cag To HE.M. Chondvasexaran, Advocate BF NO.S1274 RS (r Se7e-13.08No. DARPG/M/2009/03048(06)(GOVTN) Government of India Department of Administrative Reforms and Public Grievances Sth Floor, Sardar Patel Bhavan Parliament Street New Dethi-110 001 Dated 27/10/2009 No. DARPG/M/2009/03048 (06) (GOVIN) To Shri. S$. Mahesh Kanna Advocate, A-7, Appakannu Street Royapettah Chennai, Tamilnadu 600014 Sub:- State Govt : Miscellaneous (PG) Dear Sir, I am directed to refer to your letter dated 24/9/2009, on the subject mentoned above, and to inform you that above letter has been forwarded to Shri T.P. Rajesh Spl Officer to C M Spl Cell Government of Tamil Nadu Fort St. George, Secretariat Chennai who are concerned in the matter, for appropriate remedial action. Thanking You, Yours faithfully, pond ¥ yama Kutty) under Secretary Tel. : 23401468 e-mail : shyama.kutty@nic. in Please view our web site:- http: //darpg.nic.inF.No.24013/1/T.N./2009-( Government of India Ministry of Home Affairs New Delhi, dated 11" January, 10 To, Home Secretary, (Home Department), Government of Tamil Nadu, Secretariat, Chennai ~ 600009, Subject: Representation — Forwarding of. Sir, Lam directed to forward herewith a representation dated 15- original, received through Presidents’s Secretariat of Sh. $. Mahesh Kanna, Advocate, r/o A-7,23, Appakannu Street, Royapettah, Chennai, ‘Tamil Nadu regarding police protection to his life and property. 2. ‘Police and ‘Public Order’ are State subjects under the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution of India and it is the responsibility of the concerned State Government to prevent, detect, register and investigate crime and prosecute the criminals involved through the machinery of its law enforcement agencies 3. You are requested to take appropriate action on this reference to suitably redress the grievances of the petitioner. The action taken in the matter may please be intimated to the applicant directly Yours faithfull (Sandhya Harith) Section Officer, CSR II Tel: 23094435 Copy to: 1) Sh. K.C. Jayarajan, Addl. Comptroller, Presiden Bhavan, New Delhi w.r.. their LD. No. P1-D/14028, dated 19-11-09. 2ySh. Mahesh Kanna, Advocate, r/o A-7,23, Appakannu Street, Royapettah, s Secretariat, Rashtrapati i, Tamil Nadu, for information. You are requested to approach the concerned State Govt. Authority for redressal of your grievance. Qube (Sandhya Harith) Section Officer, CSR IllRoc No.1957/2009/F2 Date: 12/01/2010 From A.Arumugha Swamy, B.A. M.L., Registrar General High Court Madras. To Thiru K.Mahesh Kanna Advocate, A-7, 23, Appakannu Street, Royapetah Chennai - 600 014 Sir, Sub: Representation by Thiru S.Mahesh Kanna, Advocate, Chennai against Government officials -Ordered - to seek remedy before the court of law - Communicated - reg. Ref: Representation dated 09.09.2009 received from Thiru S.Mahesh Kanna, Advocate, Chennai With reference to your representation dt. 09.09.2009 presented to the Hon'ble judges and the Registrars, | am directed to inform you that you may seek remedy before the Court of Law. Yours faithfully, Dd REGISTRAR GENERAL