Telangana HC Reserved Orders in the IA Filed by Legal Representatives of Ramoji Rao
Arun Kumar argued that this attitude would send the wrong signal to society. He stated that the members of the Ramoji Rao HUF were responsible for the irregularities.
Hyderabad: In the row over continuation of criminal proceedings against Margadarsi Financiers and legal representatives of the late Ch Ramoji Rao for illegally collecting deposits, the Telangana High Court on Friday reserved orders in the interim application filed by family members of Ramoji Rao, kartha of the HUF (Hindu Undivided Family).
It is pertinent to mention here that legal representatives of Ramoji Rao had filed an interim application before the High Court raising the preliminary issue of continuation of criminal proceedings against members of the HUF, in the light of the death of Ramoji Rao. They argued that there was no vicarious liability on the members of the HUF, for any act done by the kartha of HUF (Ramoji Rao).
Former MP Undavalli Arun Kumar appearing before the High Court as party in person opposed these contentions. He argued that Margadarsi Financiers and Ramoji Rao had violated Section 45(s) of the RBI Act by collecting deposits without permission from the central bank and had continued doing so for more than 45 years. He brought to the notice of the court that the RBI had also made it clear that the deposits collected were violation of Rules and should be punished. But, no stringent action had been initiated against Margadarsi Financiers so far, and the authorities and governments were not interested in taking action against Margadarsi Financiers or on Ramoji Rao during his lifetime.
Arun Kumar argued that this attitude would send the wrong signal to society. He stated that the members of the Ramoji Rao HUF were responsible for the irregularities.
With arguments from both sides completed, a division bench of Justice P. Sam Koshy and Justice K. Sujana reserved orders in the interim application filed by the legal representatives of Ramoji Rao.
Meanwhile, advocate Lakshmi Narashimha Rao, appearing online, complained to the court that Margadarsi Financiers had not returned his deposit and he had already complained to the RBI in the matter. The court directed him to submit his contentions in written form.