Appeal against an order under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act. The appellant had only partially argued the matter and sought rearguing on a change of bench. A new hearing date was fixed as the application for further adjournment was not opposed.
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
FPA-PMLA-203/KOL/2011
Pranaw Kedia
… Appellant
Versus
The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Kolkata
… Respondent
Advocates/Authorized Representatives who appeared
For the appellant : Shri Indrajit Adhikari, Advocate For the respondent : Shri S.A. Saud, Advocate CORAM JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH : CHAIRMAN SHRI G.C. MISHRA : MEMBER SHRI B.K. BANSAL : MEMBER
ORDER
27.01.2017
FPA-PMLA-203/KOL/2011
This matter was partly argued by the learned counsel for the appellant which is also recorded in the order dated 12th May, 2016. Both the counsel submits that due to change of bench the matter is to be reargued from the both side. The arguing counsel Mr. S. Benergy, Advocate for appellant is not available today due to his personal reason. An adjournment is sought which is not opposed by the counsel for the respondent.
List for argument on 27th April, 2017.
We may clarify that no further adjournment is likely to be granted.
(Justice Manmohan Singh) Chairman
(G.C. Mishra) Member
(B.K. Bansal) Member
New Delhi,
27th January, 2017
‘K’
FPA-PMLA-203/KOL/2011
Page 1 of 1
Pranaw Kedia
The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Kolkata
MANMOHAN SINGH
G.C. MISHRA
B.K. BANSAL
As recorded by the court registry
10 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
