The Supreme Court yesterday took into consideration a submission by Attorney General Mohan Peiris PC, that the Golden Key Credit Card Company Private Limited, has not recorded some deposits, disbursements, investments and utilisation. The Court said that this was a prima facie case of financial mismanagement.

The Attorney General and the Central Bank should identify properties belonging to Directors, Executives, employees and agents of the Golden Key, so that Court could make an order under Section 25 of the Finance Companies Act to seize such properties and pay the depositors.

The properties to be identified could belong to the directors, executives, employees or the agents of the Golden Key. Properties purchased in the name of relatives of the aforesaid persons with the monies concerned, too, should be identified as seizable property. The Court said that the failure of the Monetary Board to take appropriate action subsequent to an investigation report dated December, 2006 is a violation of the depositors’ rights. The Monetary Board could have acted under section 11(1) of the Finance Companies Act and moved the District Court under Section 25 of the same Act, to seize properties of the defulters.

The Attorney General submitted to Court a schedule on the steps so far taken to identify the assets of Golden Key Directors, subsequent to the Court order of the last date of hearing. The Attorney General is to submit to the Court, a list of identified assets on May 11, 2009. Court will then decide on an order to seize, to pay the aggrieved depositors.

Ikram Mohammed PC, yesterday complained to Court of alleged defaulting of deposited money in some subsidiaries of the Ceylinco Group such as the Sussex Education Centre and the Ceylinco Sriram.

Anura Maddegoda, a Counsel for the depositors, submitted to Court a list of unencumbered assets of the Golden Key Directors.

Attorney-at-law Bastian appeared for most of the petitioners who had complained of a total loss of deposits amounting to Rs. 26 billion.