Disposed

FPA-PMLA-1482/MUM/2016 of Smt. Suza Koshy & Anr. v/s The Deputy Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Mumbai

ATFP2 Nov 2016FPA-PMLA-1482/MUM/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed liberty to cure procedural defects in the appeal against the Adjudicating Authority's order. An interim order was treated on behalf of Appellant-2, while the appeal relating to Appellant-1 was listed for future proceedings after filing the requisite documentation.

What did the court decide?

Appeal on behalf of Appellant-2 to be treated; Appellant-1's appeal listed for future filing.

FPA-PMLA-1482/MUM/2016 of Smt. Suza Koshy & Anr. v/s The Deputy… — Money Laundering | ATFP (2016)

¶1

APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PREVENTION OF MONEY LAUNDERING ACT AT NEW DELHI

¶2

MP-PMLA-2786/MUM/2016 (Stay) FPA-PMLA-1482/MUM/2016

¶3

Smt. Suza Koshy & Anr. … Appellant/Applicant Versus The Deputy Director … Respondent Directorate of Enforcement, Mumbai

¶4

Advocates/Authorized Representatives who appeared

¶5

For the appellant : Sh Sanjeev Kumar Wahid, Advocate For the respondent : Sh. Neeraj Atri, Advocate CORAM JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH : CHAIRMAN SHRI KAUSHAL SRIVASTAVA : MEMBER SHRI ANAND KISHORE : MEMBER

¶6

ORDER 02.11.2016

¶7

FPA-PMLA-1482/MUM/2016

¶8

The appeal has been filed by two appellants Ms. Suza Koshy (Appellant-1) and Shri Ramesh Prabhakar (Appellant-2) under Section 26 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act 2002 assailing the order dated 3^rd August, 2016 passed by the Adjudicating Authority. The Vakalatnama has been filed by the Appellant-2. The Original General Power of Attorney available on record is executed by Appellant-1 in favour of Appellant-2. In view of the previous order passed by this Tribunal, each aggrieved person is required to file an independent appeal. At this stage, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant seeks liberty to cure the defect. Counsel submits that the present appeal may be treated on behalf of Shri Ramesh Prabhakar, Appellant-2 who is the husband of the Appellant-1. He is ready to filing the amended memo of party within one week. Accordingly, it is directed

¶9

FPA-PMLA-1482/MUM/2016

¶10

Page 1 of 2

¶11

the present appeal be treated as an appeal on behalf of the Appellant-2. Let amended memo of parties be filed within four weeks from today. Issue notice to the respondent. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent accepts the notice and seeks time to file the reply. Reply be filed within six weeks with an advance copy to the appellant who may file rejoinder within four weeks thereafter.

¶12

As far as Ms. Suza Koshy, Appellant-1 herein is concerned, the learned counsel for the appellant submits that he would be filing the appeal on her behalf within four weeks from today. Accordingly, list this matter on 8th March, 2017.

¶13

The counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has not received the notice under Section 8(4) of the Act and once the notice is received, he will approach the Hon’ble Tribunal for seeking the interim order.

¶14

List on 8^th March, 2016

¶15

(Justice Manmohan Singh) Chairman

¶16

(Kaushal Srivastava) Member

¶17

(Anand Kishore) Member

¶18

New Delhi, 2^nd November, 2016 ‘K’

¶19

FPA-PMLA-1482/MUM/2016

¶20

Page 2 of 2

FPA-PMLA-1482/MUM/2016 of Smt. Suza Koshy & Anr. v/s The Deputy Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Mumbai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

FPA-PMLA-1482/MUM/2016 of Smt. Suza Koshy & Anr. v/s The Deputy Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Mumbai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases