Disposed

FPA-PMLA-1684/DLI/2017 of Eshan Chaturvedi v/s The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Delhi

ATFP28 Apr 2017FPA-PMLA-1684/DLI/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The tribunal fixed use and occupation charges of Rs. 56,000 and Rs. 63,000 for two properties, directing the appellant to deposit this amount within four weeks and continue monthly till the appeal concludes or order is varied.

What did the court decide?

Direction to deposit use and occupation charges within four weeks and on the 7th of every month.

FPA-PMLA-1684/DLI/2017 of Eshan Chaturvedi v/s The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Delhi — ATFP (2017) — LawSathi Research

¶1

APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PREVENTION OF MONEY LAUNDERING ACT AT NEW DELHI

¶2

MP-PMLA-3244/DLI/2017 (U.A) MP-PMLA-3243/DLI/2017 (Stay) MP-PMLA-3242/DLI/2017 (Exp.) FPA-PMLA-1684/DLI/2017

¶3

Eshan Chaturvedi … Appellant/Applicant Versus The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Delhi … Respondent

¶4

Advocates/Authorized Representatives who appeared

¶5

For the appellant	: Shri Partha Mehrotra, Advocate
For the respondent	: Shri S.K. Sharma, Advocate
CORAM
JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH	: CHAIRMAN
SHRI G.C. MISHRA	: MEMBER
SHRI B.K. BANSAL	: MEMBER

¶6

ORDER

¶7

28.04.2017

¶8

FPA-PMLA-1684/DLI/2017, MP-PMLA-3244/DLI/2017 (U.A), MPPMLA-3243/DLI/2017 (Stay) & MP-PMLA-3242/DLI/2017 (Exp.)

¶9

This order is passed in continuation with order dated 2^nd March, 2017. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the rent pertaining to the property no. 97D-Eastern Avenue, Sainik Farms, New Delhi-110062 according to the appellant is Rs. 56,000/- with regard to property no. 98- Eastern Avenue, Sainik Farms, New Delhi-110062 is 63,000 as per the magic bricks.com. In view of the last order the appellant agreed to deposit the said amount as mentioned above from the date of passing the impugned order.

¶10

FPA-PMLA-1684/DLI/2017 Page 1 of 3

¶11

On the other hand the learned counsel for the respondent submits that according to the respondent the rent of the said property is much higher and he and his client would verify the same and inform the tribunal on the next date of hearing. However he is agreeable that at this stage some order may be passed as per suggestion made on behalf of the appellant.

¶12

After furnishing the details on behalf of respondent, the interim directions as per suggestion made on behalf of appellant might be modified but till such time we are of the view that certain direction for use and occupation charges are liable to be passed. Accordingly the interim order shall continue till the next date of hearing subject to the deposit of the above mentioned amount as use and occupation charges by the appellant within four weeks from today. The appellant shall keep on depositing the said amount by 7^th of each month during the pendency of appeals or till the said order is vacated or modified.

¶13

List this application on 21^st July, 2017.

¶14

We may clarify that the said deposit shall be made from the date of passing the impugned order.

¶15

Reply in the main appeal has not been filed. The respondent is granted three weeks time to file the reply with an advance copy to the counsel for the appellant who may file the rejoinder thereafter. Liberty is granted to the respondent to file the replies in the interim application within two weeks.

¶16

List the appeal and stay application 21^st July, 2017.

¶17

FPA-PMLA-1684/DLI/2017

¶18

Page 2 of 3

¶19

Copy of the order be given ‘dasti’ to both the sides.

¶20

(Justice Manmohan Singh) Chairman

¶21

(G.C. Mishra) Member

¶22

(B.K. Bansal) Member

¶23

New Delhi, 28^th April, 2017

¶24

‘d’

¶25

FPA-PMLA-1684/DLI/2017

¶26

Page 3 of 3

FPA-PMLA-1684/DLI/2017 of Eshan Chaturvedi v/s The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

FPA-PMLA-1684/DLI/2017 of Eshan Chaturvedi v/s The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases