HC impleads Jaya’s nephew, niece in plea involving late CM’s property

A division bench comprising Justice N Kirubakaran and Justice Abdul Quddhose before whom the appeal came up for hearing on Thursday, said “As rightly pointed out by the counsel for the appellants, appropriate orders have to be passed to safeguard the vast properties left by the late chief minister. At the same time the said class II legal heirs have to be made as parties to the proceedings.”

“It is not out of context to say that without even deciding about locus standi, this court passes this order as the locus standi of the appellants would be decided later. Therefore, this court suo motu impleads, Deepa and Deepak, both residing at T Nagar as 2nd and 3rd respondents in this appeal,” the bench added along with issuing notice to both returnable by November 28.

The duo claiming to be office bearers of Dr J Jayalalithaa Peravai and members of the AIADMK party and emotionally attached to the leadership of Jayalalithaa moved the present appeal against the rejection of the petition filed by them under sections 217, 253, 254 and 278 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 seeking letters of administration to the property and credits of late Jayalalithaa.

Stating that value of estate left behind by her has been stated in the judgement in disproportionate assets case in September 27, 2014, as Rs 55.02 crore and that its present value according to their estimate is about Rs 913.41 crore, the appellants expressed apprehension that some of the third parties are in illegal custody of the properties left behind by her and hence sought to administer it through appropriate letters of administration by this court.

However, the bench on noting that the people of Tamil Nadu know about the class II legal heirs viz son and daughter of late J Jayakumar, who is the brother of the deceased Jayalalitha, said “It is not clear as to whether the aforesaid persons viz Deepa and Deepak have made any claim over the properties left behind by Jayalalithaa. Even though these two legal heirs were shown in the petition originally, subsequently, it has been deleted and that is one of the reasons that the single judge has rejected the petition for suppression of material facts.”

The bench also permitted private notice to both Deepa and Deepak through e-mail, courier and WhatsApp before posting the matter for further hearing to November 28.