When will you return and face the law? HC asks Mallya

Agencies

March 1, 2019

Mumbai, Mar 1: The Bombay High Court Friday asked fugitive businessman Vijay Mallya when would he return to India and face the ongoing legal proceedings against him.

A division bench of Justices Indrajit Mahanty and Sarang Kotwal was hearing a petition filed by Mallya against a city court's January 5 order declaring him as 'fugitive' under the newly-enacted Fugitive Economic Offenders Act (FEOA).

Mallya's lawyer Amit Desai said declaring him a fugitive and thereby permitting his assets to be confiscated would only harm the interests of his lenders.

Mallya had volunteered to repay the loans of thousands of crores of rupees which he had taken from banks, he said.

Desai called the FEOA Act "draconian".

"Prima facie this (the fugitive tag) is unconstitutional...this allows the Centre to confiscate everything, irrespective of whether a property has been bought from the proceeds of crime or not," the lawyer said.

At this, the judges said, "But this tag will go away as soon as your client comes back and faces the proceedings. The property too will be released....So, when is that happening?"

Desai said Mallya wants to return, but a British court has prohibited him from leaving the UK without its permission.

The bench pointed out that it was only a protective order as Mallya had challenged his extradition proceedings.

"You can volunteer to return. Have you ever gone to this English court and said you want to return (to India) and face pending proceedings?" the judges asked.

Mallya was declared as fugitive following a plea filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in the special FEOA court.

The next hearing on ED's application before the special court, seeking permission to start confiscation proceedings, is scheduled for March 13.

Desai said most of Mallya's properties were already attached by "some agency or another", and the confiscation "will only mean no proceeds from such properties can be used to pay off the lenders and banks".

The bench directed ED lawyer Hiten Venegaonkar to file reply to Mallya's plea by March 8.

Comments

Add new comment

Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.

‘Pay the worker before his sweat dries’: Madras High Court cites Prophet Muhammad’s teaching while ordering settlement of dues

News Network

December 21,2025

Invoking the teachings of Prophet Muhammad—“pay the worker before his sweat dries”—the Madras High Court has directed a municipal corporation to settle long-pending legal dues owed to a former counsel. The court observed that this principle reflects basic fairness and applies equally to labour and service-related disputes.

Justice G. R. Swaminathan made the observation while hearing a petition filed by advocate P. Thirumalai, who claimed that the Madurai City Municipal Corporation failed to pay him legal fees amounting to ₹13.05 lakh. Earlier, the High Court had asked the corporation to consider his representation. However, a later order rejected a major portion of his claim, prompting the present petition.

The court allowed Thirumalai to approach the District Legal Services Authority (DLSA) and submit a list of cases in which he had appeared. It also directed the corporation to settle the verified fee bills within two months, without interest. The court noted that the petitioner had waited nearly 18 years before challenging the non-payment and that the corporation could not be fully blamed, as the fee bills were not submitted properly.

‘A Matter of Embarrassment’

Justice Swaminathan described it as a “matter of embarrassment” that the State has nearly a dozen Additional Advocate Generals. He observed that appointing too many law officers often leads to unnecessary allocation of work and frequent adjournments, as government counsel claim that senior officers are engaged elsewhere.

He expressed hope that such practices would end at least in the Madurai Bench of the High Court and added that Additional Advocate Generals should “turn a new leaf” from 2026 onwards.

‘Scandalously High Amounts’

While stating that the court cannot examine the exact fees paid to senior counsel or law officers, Justice Swaminathan stressed that good governance requires public funds to be used prudently. He expressed concern over the “scandalously high amounts” paid by government and quasi-government bodies to a few favoured law officers.

In contrast, the court noted that Thirumalai’s total claim was “a pittance” considering the large number of cases he had handled.

Background

Thirumalai served as the standing counsel for the Madurai City Municipal Corporation for more than 14 years, from 1992 to 2006. During this period, he represented the corporation in about 818 cases before the Madurai District Courts.

As the former counsel was unable to hire a clerk to obtain certified copies of judgments in all 818 cases, the court directed the District Legal Services Authority to collect the certified copies within two months. The court further ordered the corporation to bear the cost incurred by the DLSA and deduct that amount from the final settlement payable to the petitioner.

Comments