Disposed

FPA-PMLA-1772/MUM/2017 of Ms. Kiran Mazumdar Shaw v/s The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Mumbai

ATFP29 May 2017FPA-PMLA-1772/MUM/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a fresh appeal under Section 26 of the PMLA against an attachment order. The Tribunal directed the appellants to file a rejoinder within four weeks after the respondent files a reply to the notice of appeal within six weeks. It also recorded submissions regarding a pending stay application under Section 8(4).

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent to file reply within six weeks and appellant to file rejoinder within four weeks thereon.

FPA-PMLA-1772/MUM/2017 of Ms. Kiran Mazumdar Shaw v/s The Deputy… — Money Laundering | ATFP (2017)

¶1

APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PREVENTION OF MONEY LAUNDERING ACT AT NEW DELHI

¶2

MP-PMLA-3464/MUM/2017 (U.H.) MP-PMLA-1385/MUM/2017 (Stay) FPA-PMLA-1772/MUM/2017

¶3

Ms. Kiran Mazumdar Shaw Versus

¶4

… Appellants/Applicants

¶5

The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Mumbai … Respondents

¶6

Advocates/Authorized Representatives who appeared

¶7

For the Appellants	:	Shri Arshdeep Singh, Advocate & Shri Meena Venugopal, Advocate
For the Respondent	:	Shri Rajeev Awasthi, Advocate
CORAM
JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH	:	CHAIRMAN
SHRI KAUSHAL SRIVASTAVA	:	MEMBER
SHRI ANAND KISHORE	:	MEMBER

¶8

ORDER 29.05.2017

¶9

MP-PMLA-3464/MUM/2017 (U.H.), MP-PMLA-1385/MUM/2017 (Stay) & FPA-PMLA-1772/MUM/2017

¶10

A fresh appeal has been filed under Section 26 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 against the order dated 01^st December, 2016 passed in O.C. No. 612/2016. The main contention of the appellant is that no notice was served upon the appellant before the attachment and confirmation of the property in dispute. Issue notice to the respondent. Mr. Rajeev Awasthi, Learned Counsel of 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 Learned Counsel of the appellant who may file the rejoinder within four weeks thereafter.

¶11

List this matter on 07^th August, 2017.

¶12

MP-PMLA-1385/MUM/2017 (Stay)

¶13

Along with the appeal, the appellant has also filed the application for

¶14

stay against taking the possession of the flat by the respondent. The

¶15

FPA-PMLA-1772/MUM/2017

¶16

Page 1 of 2

¶17

Learned Counsel for the respondent submits that the appellant cannot deal with the property as there is restrain order from the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka. The Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that in case the notice under Section 8(4) is issued, liberty be granted to the appellant to approach this Tribunal. In case notice under Section 8(4) is issued by the respondent copy of the same be served on the advocate of the appellant also so that he may press the application for stay at that stage.

¶18

(Justice Manmohan Singh) Chairman

¶19

(Kaushal Srivastava) Member

¶20

(Anand Kishore) Member

¶21

New Delhi, 29^th May, 2017

¶22

‘AS’

¶23

FPA-PMLA-1772/MUM/2017

¶24

Page 2 of 2

FPA-PMLA-1772/MUM/2017 of Ms. Kiran Mazumdar Shaw v/s The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Mumbai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

FPA-PMLA-1772/MUM/2017 of Ms. Kiran Mazumdar Shaw v/s The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Mumbai

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