The appellant failed to appear on the second call in the appeal filed under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act. The appeal was accordingly dismissed due to non-appearance.
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.
APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PREVENTION OF MONEY LAUNDERING ACT AT NEW DELHI
MP-PMLA-3480/DLI/2017 (Stay) &
FPA-PMLA-1779/DLI/2017
Anil Wadhwa … Appellant Versus The Joint Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Delhi … 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 27.09.2017 FPA-PMLA-1779/DLI/2017
No one appears on behalf of the appellant on second call. Therefore,
the appeal is accordingly dismissed.
(Justice Manmohan Singh) Chairman
(G.C. Mishra) Member New Delhi, 27th September, 2017 ‘A’
FPA-PMLA-1779/DLI/2017
Page 1 of 1
Anil Wadhwa
The Joint Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Delhi
Manmohan Singh
G.C. Mishra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
