Single line order of the Appellate Tribunal granting an adjournment to the appellant citing unavailability of counsel.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PREVENTION OF MONEY LAUNDERING ACT AT NEW DELHI
FPA-PMLA-1367/MUM/2016
M/s Devisha Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. … Appellant Versus The Deputy Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Mumbai … Respondent
Advocates/Authorized Representatives who appeared
For the appellant : Shri Mukesh Sharma, Advocate For the respondent : Shri S.A. Saud, Advocate CORAM JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH : CHAIRMAN SHRI KAUSHAL SRIVASTAVA : MEMBER SHRI ANAND KISHORE : MEMBER
ORDER 19.10.2016
FPA-PMLA-1367/MUM/2016
Yet one more an adjournment on behalf of the appellant is sought
mainly on the reason that the main counsel is not available today which is not opposed by the learned counsel for the respondent.
List on 25th November, 2016.
(Justice Manmohan Singh) Chairman
(Kaushal Srivastava) Member
(Anand Kishore)
Member
New Delhi, 19th October, 2016
‘d’
FPA-PMLA-1367/MUM/2016
Page 1 of 1
M/s Devisha Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd.
The Deputy Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Mumbai
Manmohan Singh
Kaushal Srivastava
Anand Kishore
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
