English order granting time to file reply in money laundering cases. Regarding a stay application, the tribunal noticed conflicting facts regarding land possession and ordered maintenance of status quo pending appeal. FD transfer to be handled via separate application.
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-3260/CHN/2017 (E.H.) MP-PMLA-3200/CHN/2017 (Stay) &
FPA-PMLA-1670/CHN/2017
S. Ratha … Appellant/Applicant Versus The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Chennai … Respondent
Advocates/Authorized Representatives who appeared
| For the appellant | : | Shri B. Kumar, Sr. Advocate Shri Naveen Malhotra, Advocate |
|---|---|---|
| For the respondent |
: | Shri S.K. Sharma, Advocate |
| CORAM | ||
| JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH SHRI KAUSHAL SRIVASTAVA |
: : |
CHAIRMAN MEMBER |
| SHRI ANAND KISHORE | : | MEMBER |
ORDER 08.03.2017
FPA-PMLA-1670/CHN/2017
The learned counsel for the respondent seeks time to file the reply. Let the same be filed within six weeks with an advance copy to the counsel for the appellant who may file the rejoinder within four weeks thereafter.
List on 31st July, 2017.
MP-PMLA-3200/CHN/2017 (Stay)
As far as stay application is concerned, notice under section 8(4) has been issued. The learned counsel for the respondent has made his submission that the possession of the vacant land had already been
FPA-PMLA-1670/CHN/2017
Page 1 of 2
taken, even FD’s has been transferred in the name of the appellant. As far as the transfer of FD’s is concerned, the appellant may take necessary steps by filing the separate application, if so required.
With regard to the vacant land, the appellant submits that no such possession has been taken, only Board is placed on the land.
There is difference in the fact position as contended by the two parties. It would be appropriate that they shall maintain the ‘status quo’ in respect of vacant land in question in the pendency of the appeal.
The stay application is disposed of.
(Justice Manmohan Singh) Chairman
(Kaushal Srivastava) Member
(Anand Kishore) Member
New Delhi,
8th March, 2017
‘d’
FPA-PMLA-1670/CHN/2017
Page 2 of 2
S. Ratha
Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement
Manmohan Singh
Kaushal Srivastava
Anand Kishore
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
