FR case filed by Ceylinco F&G depositors postponed as SC bench not properly constituted

By Lakmal Sooriyagoda
The fundamental rights petition filed on behalf of the depositors attached to Ceylinco F&G Companies has been deferred for September 21, since the Supreme Court bench was not properly constituted.

When the matter came up before Supreme Court Justices Buwaneka Aluwihare, L.T.B. Dehideniya and Yasantha Kodagoda Kodagoda, it was observed that the bench was not properly constituted as Justice Amarasekara is overseas.

The purpose of calling this case before the Supreme Court was to bring the attention of the court matters that have arisen out of and in relation to the Investment Agreement dated 30/04/2021, entered into between ZRA and the fifth respondent F&G Property Developers (Private) Limited and the sixth respondent F&G Real Estate Company Limited and the delay in the depositors receiving the money that they lost, which had been deposited in these two companies.

At the outset, Justice Aluwihare mentioned that there were four motions filed by the petitioners, 14th respondent, fifth and sixth respondents and the Independent Association of Depositors. 

The bench observed that since the bench was not properly constituted, the matter would be fixed for inquiry on September 21, 2022 and the respondents, who wish to reply to the said motions, may file their replies on or before September 09, 2022 and the copies of the same to be handed over to all parties, on a request made by Senior Counsel Ian Fernando, stating that there would be transparency in their reply for the motions filed by the four parties. 

It was stated that if the parties could exchange their replies among each other, it would be helpful and give a date to reply to the said replies (re-replies) filed in court after the parties have seen the replies to the motion. 

The above was formulated by court since senior counsel Ian Fernando for the Independent Association of Depositors had stated that there is grave discrepancy on the part of ZRA on the procedure set out by court for them to follow, as they have violated the conditions by: (a) opening a bank account without a mandate and (b) by ZRA nominally transferring Rs.250 million, when they were to transfer Rs.500 million, although they had been asked to transfer shares to the value of Rs.500 million to the company.

Although the case literally stands terminated, since grave injustice has been caused to the Independent Association of Depositors, they have filed their motion through their lawyers Derek Fernando Associates.  

Faiszer Musthapha PC appeared for the fifth and sixth respondents, Senior Counsel Ian Fernando appeared with Chavindri Perera, Attorney-at-Law, for the Independent Association of Depositors, Palitha Ranasinghe PC appeared for the Central Bank and Priyal Wijayaweera PC appeared on behalf of ZRA Holdings (Pvt.) Ltd.