Disposed

FPA-PMLA-1693/JP/2017 of Surendra Kumar Sharma v/s The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Jaipur

ATFP23 Mar 2017FPA-PMLA-1693/JP/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Appellate Tribunal granted six weeks for the respondent to file a reply to a fresh appeal under Section 26 of the PMLA. Regarding a related case concerning immoveable property, the court approved a monthly rental deposit agreement and directed the stay of the notice operation for that specific property.

What did the court decide?

Time granted for reply; Stay of notice under Section 8(4) granted for the immoveable property subject to rental deposit.

FPA-PMLA-1693/JP/2017 of Surendra Kumar Sharma v/s The Deputy… — Money Laundering | ATFP (2017)

¶1

APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PREVENTION OF MONEY LAUNDERING ACT AT NEW DELHI

¶2

FPA-PMLA-1693/JP/2017

¶3

Surendra Kumar Sharma … Appellant/Applicant

¶4

Versus

¶5

The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Jaipur

¶6

… Respondent

¶7

Advocates/Authorized Representatives who appeared

¶8

For the appellant	: Shri Rajeev Avasthi, Advocate
For the respondent	: Shri Vikas Garg, Advocate
CORAM
JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH	: CHAIRMAN
SHRI G.C. MISHRA	: MEMBER
SHRI B.K. BANSAL	: MEMBER

¶9

ORDER

¶10

23.03.2017

¶11

FPA-PMLA-1693/JP/2017

¶12

The appellant have filed the fresh appeal under Section 26 of the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002, impugning the order dated 21^st February, 2017. Issue notice to the respondent Mr. Vikas Garg learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent accepts the notice who seeks six weeks time to file the reply. Let reply be filed within six weeks with an advance copy to the learned counsel for the appellant who may file the rejoinder four weeks thereafter.

¶13

List this appeal for consideration on 14^th July, 2017.

¶14

FPA-PMLA-1693/JP/2017

¶15

Page 1 of 3

¶16

MP-PMLA/3313/JP/2017

¶17

Learned counsel for the appellant has only pressed for the relief at this stage, pertaining to immoveable properties i.e. House No. 1, Kha-6, Vaishali Nagar, Ajmer which was purchased by Shri Surendra Kumar Sharma on 06^th December, 2000. The said property was registered with Sub-Registrar-I, Ajmer in the name of the appellant Mr. Surendra Kumar Sharma and his wife. According to the appellant, house was purchased for a sum of Rs. 5,99,040/- inclusive of registry charges.

¶18

Mr. Rajeev Avasthi, Learned Advocate states that the appellant are residing in the said property and they undertake not to dispose of or create third party interest in the said exclusive immoveable property directly or indirectly in any manner till the appeal is finally decided. After small submission he agrees on behalf of the appellant that the appellant shall deposit the sum of Rs. 25,000/- per month towards the rental charge of the said property. The first deposit shall be made on 01^st April, 2017. The impugned order in the above said matter was passed on 21^st February, 2017. As far as the deposit of the rental from the date of passing of the impugned order till 31^st March, 2017 is concerned the said arrear shall be deposited within two months from today.

¶19

Mr. Vikas Garg, learned counsel for the respondent submits that he has taken the rough idea from his client and according to him the rental charges of the said property is about Rs. 40,000/- per month. Since there are two version of both the parties, under these circumstances, let the respondent may file the valuation certificate on or before the next date and the application of the appellant will be considered on merit. Subject to the condition of the deposit of the said amount as mentioned above, operation of

¶20

FPA-PMLA-1693/JP/2017

¶21

Page 2 of 3

¶22

the notice already issued under Section 8(4) shall remain stayed respect of

¶23

this property only.

¶24

List on 14^th July, 2017.

¶25

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

¶26

(Justice Manmohan Singh) Chairman

¶27

(G.C. Mishra) Member

¶28

(B.K. Bansal) Member

¶29

New Delhi, 23^rd March, 2017

¶30

‘A’

¶31

FPA-PMLA-1693/JP/2017

¶32

Page 3 of 3

FPA-PMLA-1693/JP/2017 of Surendra Kumar Sharma v/s The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Jaipur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

FPA-PMLA-1693/JP/2017 of Surendra Kumar Sharma v/s The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Jaipur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases