Partly allowed

FPA-PMLA-1757/DLI/2017 of Sonu Kumar @ Jai Kumar @ Jayash Kumar v/s The Joint Director Directorate of Enforcement, Delhi

ATFP11 May 2017FPA-PMLA-1757/DLI/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Appellate Tribunal allowed liberty to the respondent to file a reply while maintaining status quo on attached residential property. The court directed the appellant to deposit a reasonable amount for use and occupation to pass the interim order on the next hearing date, noting no notice under s. 8(4) PMLA was received. Case listed on 1 September 2017.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to respondent to file reply; status quo maintained; conditional permission to pass interim order upon deposit of reasonable amount for use and occupation charges of attached property.

FPA-PMLA-1757/DLI/2017 of Sonu Kumar @ Jai Kumar @ Jayash Kumar… — Money Laundering | ATFP (2017)

¶1

APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PREVENTION OF MONEY LAUNDERING ACT AT NEW DELHI

¶2

MP-PMLA-3415/PTN/2017 (Stay) FPA-PMLA-1757/DLI/2017

¶3

Sonu Kumar @ Jai Kumar … Appellant/Applicant @ Jayash Kumar Versus The Joint Director Directorate of Enforcement, Delhi … Respondent

¶4

Advocates/Authorized Representatives who appeared

¶5

For the appellant : Shri Ritesh Singh, Advocate For the respondent : Shri N.K. Matta, Advocate CORAM JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH : CHAIRMAN SHRI G.C. MISHRA : MEMBER SHRI B.K. BANSAL : MEMBER

¶6

ORDER 11.05.2017

¶7

FPA-PMLA-1757/DLI/2017

¶8

The appellant has filed the present appeal under section 26 of the PML Act 2002 challenging the order dated 21^st February, 2017 passed in O.C. 652/2016. Issue notice to the respondent. Mr. N.K. Matta, Advocate learned counsel for the respondent accepts the notice and seeks time to file the reply. Let the reply be filed within six weeks with an advance copy to the counsel for the appellant who may file the rejoinder within four weeks thereafter.

¶9

List on 1^st September, 2017

¶10

FPA-PMLA-1734/PTN/2017

¶11

Page 1 of 2

¶12

MP-PMLA-3415/PTN/2017 (Stay)

¶13

The learned counsel for the appellant is pressing for interim order. The grounds of prayers are made in the appeal itself. The property attached in question is a residential house and the appellant is receiving the rent sum of Rs. 5000/- per month from the tenants. The learned counsel for the appellant undertakes that his client shall not sell the property directly or indirectly during the pendency of the appeal. He submits that interim order may be passed as his client is in patna. No notice u/s 8(4) is received by the appellant. The counsel for appellant is accordingly to take the instruction from his client to deposit the reasonable amount for the use and occupation charges.

¶14

In the meanwhile liberty is granted to the respondent to file the reply within six weeks with an advance copy to the counsel for the appellant who may file the rejoinder within four weeks thereafter. We are in view of that if the reasonable amount be deposited by the appellant we would pass the interim order on the next date of hearing.

¶15

Till the next date both parties shall maintain the status quo in respect of the attached property.

¶16

List on 1^st September, 2017

¶17

(Justice Manmohan Singh) Chairman

¶18

(G.C. Mishra) Member

¶19

(B.K. Bansal) Member

¶20

New Delhi, 11^th May, 2017 ‘s’

¶21

FPA-PMLA-1734/PTN/2017

¶22

Page 2 of 2

FPA-PMLA-1757/DLI/2017 of Sonu Kumar @ Jai Kumar @ Jayash Kumar v/s The Joint Director Directorate of Enforcement, Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

FPA-PMLA-1757/DLI/2017 of Sonu Kumar @ Jai Kumar @ Jayash Kumar v/s The Joint Director Directorate of Enforcement, Delhi

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