The appellate tribunal recorded the appellant's proposal to retain attachment of two properties pending prosecution outcomes while depositing the value for a specific third property without prejudice to their rights, adjourning the matter for filing a detailed affidavit.
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-1799/HYD/2015 (Stay) & FPA-PMLA-961/HYD/2015 M/s Walden Properties Pvt. Ltd … Appellant/ Applicant Versus The Joint Director Directorate of Enforcement, Delhi … Respondent
Advocates/Authorized Representatives who appeared
For the appellant : Shri Yogesh Raavi, Advocate For the respondent : Shri S.A. Saud, Advocate CORAM JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH : CHAIRMAN SHRI ANAND KISHORE : MEMBER
ORDER 11.08.2017
FPA-PMLA-961/HYD/2015
By the impugned order dated 20th May, 2015, the following
properties attached were confirmed:
| S.No. | Property Description | Name of the Party |
Value of the property (in Rs.) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. | 150 Acres of land in Sy. Nos. 99/1 Mamidipalli Village, Saroor Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District vide Deed of Sale dated 02.02.2009 |
M/s Indu Techzone Private Limited |
30,00,00,000/- |
| 2. | 100 Acres of land in Sy. Nos. 99/1 Mamidipalli Village, Saroor Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District registered vide Assignment Deed No. 10672/2007 dated 26.09.2007 |
M/s SPR Properties Private Limited |
20,00,00,000/- |
| 3. | Land admeasuring 2835 Sq. yards situated in Sy. No. 81/1 of Jeedimetla, Qutbullapur Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, executed vide sale deed dated 22.04.2006 |
MM/s Walden Properties Private Limited |
3,11,85,000/- |
FPA-PMLA-961/HYD/2015 Page 1 of 2
between M/s Indu Projects Limited and M/s Walden Properties Private Limited
Learned counsel for the appellant has made his submissions on merit yesterday also. Today these three matters are taken up. Learned counsel for the appellant has suggested after taking the instruction from his client, that without prejudice, his client is agreeable to make the statement that with regard to property mentioned at serial No. 1 and 2 the attachment may continue till the final decision of prosecution complaint. During this period the occupier of certain flats would not be disturbed.
Pertaining to the property shown at serial No. 3 his client is agreeable to deposit the value of the property amount with the respondent without prejudice and if his client is not convicted in the criminal complaint, the said amount be released to the appellant without any delay. Counsel for the appellant submits that the said suggestion is made because of the reason that the said property was attached in lieu of value thereof.
The said statement is made by the appellant. The Special Court would decide the matter without any influence of the impugned order and the provisional attachment order. Counsel for the respondent seeks time to take instruction. In the meanwhile, let the appellant file the detailed affidavit of the said proposal.
List on 06th September, 2017.
(Justice Manmohan Singh) Chairman
(Anand Kishore)
Member
New Delhi, 11th August, 2017 ‘A’
FPA-PMLA-961/HYD/2015 Page 2 of 2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the appellant was agreeable to the attachment of properties or deposit of value to regularise its position.
M/s Walden Properties Pvt. Ltd
The Joint Director Directorate of Enforcement, Delhi
Manmohan Singh
Anand Kishore
As recorded by the court registry
24 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
