Dear Brothers and Sisters, #Epistle 4 #DMK #Kalaignar #Karunanidhi You would have read through the three epistles he important views in the judgement delivered by judge Cunha on Sept 27 which I have compiled and presented for you. Judge Cunha further stated in his verdict, · “The argument advanced by Jayalalitha’s defence lawyer that as far as Jaya Publications was concerned, Jayalalitha had given power of attorney to Sasikala and hence she was not aware of the happenings in the firm. This argument cannot be accepted. Undisputedly, Jayalalitha was a partner of the said firm and there was no necessity for her to execute any power of attorney in favour of Sasikala. The purpose behind executing the power of attorney in favour of her appears to be to give her a free hand in the management of the Jaya Publications and on that guise, Jayalalitha has taken up a defence that she was a dormant partner and was not aware of the transactions carried on by Sasikala. But, by executing the G.P.A. in favour of her, Jayalalitha has rendered herself liable for all acts and deeds performed by her pursuant to the powers conferred under the G.P.A. As already stated above, it is proved in evidence that substantial funds accumulated by Jayalalitha were credited to the account of Jaya Publications and from the said account, it was diverted to the other accounts and ultimately was utilized for the acquisition of huge assets. Therefore, it has to be presumed that Jayalalitha was aware of the transfer of these funds and the purpose for which these funds were transferred to the other accounts. Even otherwise, she being the agent of Jayalalitha was bound to keep Jayalalitha posted with these facts. Therefore, it does not lie in the mouth of Jayalalitha to contend that being a dormant partner she was unaware of the activities carried on by Sasikala. The circumstance of executing the power of attorney in favour of her indicates that with a view to keep herself secure from legal complications, Jayalalitha executed the said power of attorney knowing fully well that under the said powers, she would be dealing with her funds credited to her account in Jaya Publications. “The contention of Jayalalitha that she was not aware of such activities of the other three who were living in her house. How can the contention of a Chief Minister of a State that she was not aware of the activities of those living in her house, can be accepted? Similarly she cannot also deny that they did not at all live in her house because in the voters’ list only 36, Poes garden is the address of the three. Further, when Jayalalitha was asked what for they were living in her house, she only replied that she did not want to reply and not denied their co-living. Moreover when Sasikala and Ilavarasi were not her blood relatives Jayalalitha could not clarify as to why they were living with her.” “Sasikala and Ilavarasi also did not answer this question. In fact they have separate families and both are married. Why should they keep away from their families and live with Jayalalitha in the same house for so many years? What is the reason? The gifts for Jayalalitha and money earned in wrong ways using her name had all come through only Sasikala. Ilavarasi was only used for taking them all to Jayalalitha’s house.” “Jayalalitha cannot say that she was not aware of the firms run by Sasikala and Ilavarasi. Because, Jayalalitha has given Rs One crore to Sasi Enterprises. Moreover, for all the loans obtained by them Jayalalitha has given surety cheques in her name. Through this, it has been proved that they all got together and acted well aware of their actions and that they could not account for the properties in their names”, explains judge Cunha. Not only disproportionate assets but also disproportionate expenses had affected Jayalalitha now. In the disproportionate assets case in Bangalore, the pomposity of her then foster son is also the basic instance for her disproportionate expenditure. The TN DVAC has filed lot of evidence like receipts, income tax returns, witnesses, estimates of PWD officers etc for the pompous manner in which Jayalalitha conducted Sudhakaran’s wedding. But Jayalalitha had no evidence to dispute them. Shall we see how judge Cunha has explained about it in his verdict? “A sum of Rs.6,45,04,222/- is incurred by Jayalalitha for the performance of the marriage of her foster son VN Sudhakaran. The break-up of the said expenses are given as under; a) Expenses towards the erection of marriage pendal over and above the admitted / recorded payments Rs.5,21,23,532/- b) Expenditure incurred towards cost of food, mineral water and tamboolam Rs.1,14,96,125/- c) Cost of 34 Titan Watches Rs. 1,34,565/- d) Amount paid to Tr. Syed Bawkar towards stiching of wedding dress for A-3 Rs. 1,26,000/- e) Amount paid for purchase of 100 silver plates (paid by N. Sasikala) Rs. 4,00,000/- f) Postal expenses for dispatch of 56000 wedding invitations Rs. 2,24,000/- According to the prosecution, Jayalalitha performed the marriage of her foster-son on 09.07.1995 with all fanfare, pomp and grandeur spending a sum of Rs.6,45,04,222/-. In order to prove the said expenditure the prosecution has relied on the oral evidences of prosecution witnesses and large number of documents are marked through these witnesses. “PW.181 Sri. Thangarajan was the Asst. Engineer, P.W.D at the relevant point of time. According to this witness on 17.04.1997, the Chief Engineer, P.W.D. ordered him to meet the Supdt. of Anti Corruption Bureau. Accordingly, on 18.04.1997, PW.181 and the Jr. Engineer Tr. Vasudevan met PW.259 in his office. PW.259 entrusted him the work of estimating the expenses incurred towards the wedding reception of Tr. V.N.Sudhakaran (A-3) the foster son of A-1. In order to prepare the estimation he consulted the Architect Vijayshankar, Art Directors Thota Tharani and Gopinath, assistant of Thota Tharani Mr. Ramesh, Shrinivasan, assistant of Mr. Ramesh, B.S. Mani, the Electrician, Sayyed Mohammed and others. He estimated the expenditure at the prices of materials at the time of marriage and accordingly their estimation was Rs. 5.91 crore. Jayalalitha’s lawyer B.Kumar argued that these estimates made two and a half years after the wedding were not acceptable and the witnesses who made the estimates did not directly witness the marriage. What understanding could they have about the pandal and decoration and hence their submissions should not be accepted. K.P.Muttuswami, Chief Engineer, P.W.D, Tamil Nadu, is examined by the prosecution to prove the expenses incurred. According to this witness, when he was in service, he used to supervise the work of putting up shamiyanas for Government functions. He knew Jawahar Babu, the Asst. Secretary of Ex-Chief Minister Jayalalitha. In the first week of July, 1995, Jawahar Babu contacted him over phone and asked him to come over to Chief-Minister’s house in connection with the marriage to be held in her house. On the next day, he met Jawahar Babu in the Chief Minister’s house. He took him to the first floor and introduced him to Sasikala. Sasikala asked him to complete the pendal work as early as possible in a good way. According to him the plan was given to him by an architect Vijayshankar. As per the plan, he arranged to level the land and marked the place to install the pendal in MRC Nagar ground. Five main pendals measuring 70 feet x 750 feet were put up with coconut leaves for the performance of marriage ceremonies. These pendals were put up by Tuticorin Rajappa Nadar. 8 coconut leaves pendals measuring 60 feet x 450 feet each were put up to serve food for public and these were put up by Ramachandran Nadar from Chennai. Two pendals with measurement of 60 feet x 200 feet for serving food for VIPs were put up by Mannargudi Rajagopal. Eight kitchen sheds measuring 60 x 90 feet were also put up. One cooking shed for VIPs measuring 45 x 135 feet was put up with asbestos sheets by Kumaresan Nadar. Marriage platform, bathroom, rooms for the bride and bridegroom measuring 9392 sq.ft. were built with bricks and roofed with A.C. sheet. This work was done by Ethiraj. The rooms for the bride and bridegrooms were air-conditioned. The air conditioner expenses were met by Ex-Chief Minister’s house. The expenses of the above mentioned pendals were also met by the Ex-Chief Minister Selvi Jayalalitha’s house (family). Marriage platform, VIP sitting place, VIP cooking place and decoration on the side of pendals were done by the Art Director Gopinath. For water facilities, 5 borewells were dug by Paul Dasan. Water was also supplied through Lorries. The work of laying gravel road was done by K.V.Natarajan. The electrical connection was given by C.S.Chandrasekhar from Tanjore. He had brought 2-10 KW generators and 4 mobile generators”. When these works were in progress, Jayalalitha and Sasikala inspected them, according to the deposition of Muthusamy. Other than the amount given by the father of the bride Narayanasamy, all other amounts were paid by Jayalalitha in cheques from her bank accounts. They were all proved by the statements obtained from the banks. A cheque for Rs.1.50 lakh was given from the Poes Garden to a North Indian beauty expert Palbabu. Jayalalitha has given her personal cheques to Subramani and Samy who laid the road from Adyar Vinayaka temple to MRC Nagar and lighting arrangements on either side. During her deposition in the court on Sudhakaran’s wedding, Jayalalitha has maintained that she did not spend anything for the marriage and she had clarified the same in the reply to the Income Tax department. But in the IT return for 1996-97 submitted by her, she has mentioned marriage expenses as Rs.25,98,521 and expenses in cash as Rs.3,94,240. According to the documents seized from the house of Jayalalitha’s auditor, it has been clearly mentioned in the accounts submitted to the IT department that the expenditure for that wedding was Rs.12.50 lakh towards ads in dailies and publicity. Judge Cunha has stated that Jayalalitha side could not answer the question as to why she gave her personal cheques for pandal, lighting, cars and invitations if all the marriage expenses were borne by the family of the bride. Many persons who were engaged for the works of the marriage have deposed in this case. A do not want to go on telling them all. Brothers and sisters, this series of epistles under the heading ‘ஒய்யாரக் கொண்டையாம்; தாழம்பூவாம்” is being published for four days. The verdict of the special court judge is very lengthy and detailed. As I said earlier first I did not want to make any comments on the verdict. But those who instigated me to say my views were ruling ADMK men and some dailies. Yes. This detailed series of epistles is only to clarify some truths due to the false propaganda in the wordings of the advertisements published in the ruling party daily on the day the court granted conditional bail for Jayalalitha! For instance, in today epistle also Judge Cunha has proved with evidence that the contentions of Jayalalitha that she was not aware of the activities of Jaya Publications, she was not aware of such activities indulged in by Sasikala, Sudhakaran and Ilavarasi living in her house, she did not know anything about the firms run by Sasikala and Ilavarasi and that she did not spend anything for Sudhakaran’s wedding were all lies. Except that I wanted to bring them out, I want to once again clarify it was not my intention to injure the feelings of anybody, as I had already stated.
Posted on: Fri, 24 Oct 2014 10:29:59 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015