Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

3. It is seen from the copy of the allegations made in the affidavit filed along with the complaint filed by the third respondent under section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. that, 3(i) YMCA, Madras has properties worth more than Rs.700 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis and Croroes. A proposal for constructing Convention Centre, Guest Rooms and Commercial Centre in the land owned by YMCA in Kottivakkam was conceived by the YMCA and a Memorandum of Undertaking (MoU) was entered into between YMCA, Madras and M/s.Crystal Creations (India) Pvt. Ltd., on 30.04.2009. The developer would construct buildings for a built-up area of 8,71,200 sq.ft. in 10 acres of land. Out of this constructed area, 47% will be handed over to YMCA, Madras and 53% will be retained and enjoyed by the developer for a period of 99 years. The developer will have to pay Rs.5,00,000/- annually towards rent to the YMCA, Madras, with periodical increase of 10% every 10 Years.

3(iv) The salient terms of the MoU approved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court are as follows:-

a. The 10 acres of land earmarked for development, will be divided into two pieces of 5 acres and set out to each party namely YMCA, Madras (Land Owner) and M/s. Crystal Creations Pvt Ltd., (developer). The northern part consisting of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis and acres would be allotted to YMCA, and would be known as Owner's land or Land Owner's Share of Property (LSP). The Southern part would be allotted to the M/s. Crystal Creations Pvt. Ltd., and would be known as Developer's Land or Developer's Share of Property (DSP).

8. Considered the rival submissions and perused the records.

9. It is not in dispute that the third respondent and petitioners are the members of YMCA, Madras. It is claimed that the first petitioner Mr.P.Asir Pandian is the General Secretary of YMCA Madras. Third respondent had given a complaint on 08.07.2021 to the Commissioner of Police making allegations of criminal misappropriation of funds of YMCA. This complaint was enquired by the Sub-Inspector of Police EDF-III, Team- III, CCB, Veppery, Chennai and final report was filed. After referring the MoU between M/s.Crystal Creations (India) Pvt. Ltd., and YMCA, Madras, the suit filed before the court in C.S.No.862 of 2003, OSA No. 142 of 2009 and C.A.Nos.1798 to 1800 of 2013 and 1801 to 1803 of 2013 and the MoU reached and approved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the complaint was https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis and closed stating that as per the terms of MoU part-22 serial number 10.6 especially serial numbers 10.6 (1) and 10.6 (9) there was an agreement to resolve the dispute between the parties through a civil Court. Accordingly, since the issue related to civil dispute, there is no cause for registration of first information report and therefore, the complaint was closed. Thereafter, third respondent filed the complaint under section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. and order passed thereon is now challenged.

The aforesaid are only illustrations and not exhaustive of all conditions which may warrant preliminary inquiry.”

19. The allegations against the petitioners in the complaint are related to corrupt practices adopted by them in handling the funds. Thus, https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis and this Court is of the view that a preliminary enquiry is required before deciding as to whether the registration of the first information report is necessary or not. The complaint given by the third respondent was closed for the reason that the MoU between YMCA, Madras and M/s.Crystal Creations (India) Pvt. Ltd., has a term for settling the dispute between them in the Civil Court. This particular term for settling the dispute between them in a Civil Court does not mean that if cognizable offence is committed by the members and office bearers of YMCA, Madras, and it comes to light, no criminal prosecution can be launched.