The Appellate Tribunal considered an appeal against an attachment order under the PMLA. The appellant submitted no objection to continuing the attachment during the pendency of the prosecution and promised to file an affidavit if required.
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
MP- PMLA-1967/HYD/2015 (Stay) &
FPA-PMLA-1044/HYD/2015
Lepakshi Integrated Textile … Applicant/Appellant Park Pvt. Ltd. Versus The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Hyderabad … Respondent
Advocates/Authorized Representatives who appeared
| For the appellant | : | Shri Yogesh Raavi, Advocate |
|---|---|---|
| For the respondent | : | Shri S.A. Saud, Advocate |
CORAM JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH : CHAIRMAN SHRI ANAND KISHORE : MEMBER
ORDER 11.08.2017
FPA-PMLA-1044/HYD/2015
By the impugned order, the various moveable and immoveable properties were attached, the details of which are mentioned in para 2.1 & 2.2 of the confirmation impugned order. The learned counsel for the appellant has made his submissions for some time. The suggestion is given by the learned counsel for the appellant that that without prejudice, his client has no objection that the attachment order be continued during the pendency of the prosecution complaint which is pending before the Special Court. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that he would be filing the affidavit if so required. Counsel for the respondent seeks time to take the instructions.
FPA-PMLA-1044/HYD/2015
Page 1 of 2
List on 06th September, 2017.
(Justice Manmohan Singh) Chairman
(Anand Kishore)
Member
New Delhi, 11th August, 2017
‘A’
FPA-PMLA-1044/HYD/2015
Page 2 of 2
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the order of attachment of immovable and movable properties should be continued during the pendency of the prosecution complaint.
Whether the appellant raises any objection to the continuation of the attachment order during the trial period.
Lepakshi Integrated Textile & Apparel Park Pvt. Ltd.
The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Hyderabad
MANMOHAN SINGH
ANAND KISHORE
As recorded by the court registry
17 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
