Appellant sought 4 weeks to file reply and right to file rejoinder after reply was not on record. Interim order continued until listing.
Granted four weeks to file reply; appellant allowed to file rejoinder thereafter; interim order continued.
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-2948/DLI/2016 (U.A.) MP-PMLA-2949/DLI/2016 (Stay) FPA-PMLA-1557/DLI/2016
Neeraj Jain … Appellant/Applicant
Versus The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Delhi … Respondent
Advocates/Authorized Representatives who appeared
| For the appellant | : Mohd. Talha, Advocate |
|---|---|
| For the respondent |
: Shri Vikas Garg, Advocate |
| CORAM | |
| JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH | : CHAIRMAN |
| SHRI G.C. MISHRA | : MEMBER |
| SHRI B.K. BANSAL | : MEMBER |
ORDER 28.04.2017
FPA-PMLA-1557/DLI/2016
The reply is not on record. Four weeks time is granted to the respondent to file the reply with an advance copy to the counsel for the appellant who may file the rejoinder thereafter.
List on 15th September, 2017.
Interim order to continue.
(Justice Manmohan Singh) Chairman
(G.C. Mishra) Member
(B.K. Bansal) Member
New Delhi, 28th April, 2017
‘d’
FPA-PMLA-1557/DLI/2016
Page 1 of 1
Neeraj Jain
The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Delhi
Manmohan Singh
G.C. Mishra
B.K. Bansal
As recorded by the court registry
13 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
