The appellant requested an adjournment due to counsel's unavailability at the Supreme Court, which was opposed by the respondent, leading to a listing without a decision.
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-2073/COCHIN/2015 (AD)
&
FPA-PMLA-557/COCHIN/2014
Alice George … Appellant/Applicant
Versus
The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Cochin … Respondent
Advocates/Authorized Representatives who appeared
For the appellant : Shri N.P. Rakeesh Parkker, Advocate For the respondent : Shri S.A. Saud, Advocate CORAM JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH : CHAIRMAN SHRI KAUSHAL SRIVASTAVA : MEMBER SHRI ANAND KISHORE : MEMBER
ORDER 01.05.2017
FPA-PMLA-557/COCHIN/2014
Copy of the FIR No. 1056/2012 dated 28th January, 2013 has been filed. English translation was filed earlier. The arguing counsel on behalf of the appellant is not available as he is busy in the Supreme Court and adjournment is requested. Request is strongly opposed by the learned counsel for the respondent.
List on 21st September, 2017.
Justice Manmohan Singh) Chairman
(Kaushal Srivastava)
Member
(Anand Kishore) Member
New Delhi, 01st May, 2017 ‘A’
FPA-PMLA-557/COCHIN/2014
Page 1 of 1
Alice George
The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Cochin
Justice Manmohan Singh
Shri Kaushal Srivastava
Shri Anand Kishore
As recorded by the court registry
7 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
