The Tribunal listed the appeal for 3rd October 2017. Counsel for the appellant filed a written synopsis, and the respondent was granted time to file a reply on the next date of hearing. No adjudication on merits occurred.
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-252/AHD/2010 (SP)
&
FPA-PMLA-62/AHD/2010
Ramkaran Chotalal Yadav … Appellant/ Applicant Versus The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Ahmedabad … Respondent
Advocates/Authorized Representatives who appeared
For the appellant : Shri N.M. Kapadia, Advocate For the respondent : Shri Rajeev Awasthi, Advocate CORAM JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH : CHAIRMAN SHRI ANAND KISHORE : MEMBER ORDER 31.08.2017
FPA-PMLA-62/AHD/2010
Learned counsel for the appellant has filed the written synopsis. The
learned counsel for the respondent seeks time to file the same. Let the same be filed on or before the next date of hearing.
List on 3rd October, 2017.
(Justice Manmohan Singh) Chairman
(Anand Kishore) Member
New Delhi, 31st August, 2017. ‘s’
FPA-PMLA-62/AHD/2010
Page 1 of 1
1 issue framed by the court
Whether written synopsis by counsel for the appellant should be accepted allowing respondent to file replied synopsis on next date.
Ramkaran Chotalal Yadav
The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Ahmedabad
Manmohan Singh
Anand Kishore
As recorded by the court registry
20 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
