Dismissed

FPA-FE-86/DLI/2003 of Shri Gurucharan Singh v/s The Special Director Directorate of Enforcement, Delhi

ATFP4 Dec 2017FPA-FE-86/DLI/2003

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order dismisses four appeals under the FEMA for non-prosecution. The Tribunal observed that the appellant's counsel failed to appear, repeatedly sought adjournments on the ground of pending writ petitions in the High Court which were subsequently dismissed, and the appellant was desirous of wasting the Tribunal's time.

What did the court decide?

Four appeals (FPA-FE-86/DLI/2003, FPA-FE-109/DLI/2003, FPA-FE-300/DLI/2003, FPAFE-302/DLI/2003) were dismissed for non-prosecution.

FPA-FE-86/DLI/2003 of Shri Gurucharan Singh v/s The Special… — Banking and Recovery | ATFP (2017)

¶1

APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, FOREIGN EXCHANGE MANAGEMENT ACT AT NEW DELHI

¶2

FPA-FE-86/DLI/2003

¶3

Shri Gurucharan Singh … Appellant Versus The Special Director Directorate of Enforcement, Delhi … Respondent

¶4

Advocates/Authorized Representatives who appeared

¶5

For the Appellant	: None
For the Respondent	: Shri Pankaj Yadav, Legal Consultant
CORAM
SMT. ANANYA RAY	: MEMBER

¶6

ORDER

¶7

04.12.2017

¶8

FPA-FE-86/DLI/2003

¶9

The learned counsel for the respondent stated that the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi has already dismissed the writ petition no. 1973/2004 and 9522/2005 by their order dated 20^th July, 2016 for nonprosecution. The Hon’ble High Court has stated that “it appears that the petitioners are not keen to prosecute the present petitions” .

¶10

Since July, 2016 the appellants through their counsel have been seeking adjournments on this ground that the matter is pending in the High Court. They have thus blatantly misguided this tribunal and have sought adjournments time and again now for more than a year.

¶11

Shri Naveen Malhotra, Advocate of the appellant does not appear today also and again has sought adjournment through a written letter dated 04.12.2017 placed on record, on the same ground as also that he was busy elsewhere.

¶12

FPA-FE-86/DLI/2003

¶13

Page 1 of 2

¶14

From the above, it is clear that they have been blantantly misguiding this Tribunal and have been seeking time and also wasting the precious time of this Tribunal. It is quite clear that they are not keen to prosecute the present petitions. Thus all the four appeals no. FPA-FE86/DLI/2003, FPA-FE-109/DLI/2003, FPA-FE-300/DLI/2003 & FPAFE-302/DLI/2003 are dismissed for non-prosecution.

¶15

(Ananya Ray) Member

¶16

New Delhi, 4^th December, 2017. ‘D’

¶17

FPA-FE-86/DLI/2003

¶18

Page 2 of 2

FPA-FE-86/DLI/2003 of Shri Gurucharan Singh v/s The Special Director Directorate of Enforcement, Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

FPA-FE-86/DLI/2003 of Shri Gurucharan Singh v/s The Special Director Directorate of Enforcement, Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases