The Appellate Tribunal under the PMLA order dated 16.08.2017 directed the appellant to pay the cost as filed by the respondent. No substantive decision or reasoning is provided in the order.
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.
PPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PREVENTION OF MONEY LAUNDERING ACT AT NEW DELHI
MP-PMLA-1874/LKW/2015 (A.D.) MP-PMLA-222/LKW/2011 (Stay)
&
FPA-PMLA-175/LKW /2011
Sunil Kumar Sinha … Appellant/Applicant Versus The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Lucknow … Respondent
Advocates/Authorized Representatives who appeared
| For the appellant | : None |
|---|---|
| For the respondent | : Shri Nitesh Rana, Advocate |
| CORAM | |
| JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH | : CHAIRMAN |
| SHRI G.C. MISHRA | : MEMBER |
ORDER 16.08.2017
FPA-PMLA-175/LKW /2011
The learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the appellant
has not paid the cost. The appellant is directed to pay the cost, if already not paid.
List on 13th November, 2017.
(Justice Manmohan Singh)
Chairman
(G.C. Mishra) Member
New Delhi, 16th August, 2017 ‘d’
FPA-PMLA-175/LKW/2011
Page 1 of 1
Sunil Kumar Sinha
The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Lucknow
Manmohan Singh
G.C. Mishra
As recorded by the court registry
10 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
