This is a one-line order in a forfeiture appeal where no one appeared for the appellant. The respondent replied and was allowed to file a rejoinder, which was closed. Both parties were permitted to file written synopses for the next listing.
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 FOR FORFEITED PROPERTY AT NEW DELHI
MP-ND-173/DLI/2016 (Misc.) MP-ND-163/DLI/2016 (Stay) FPA-ND-81/DLI/2016
Gurjeet Singh … Appellant
Versus
The Competent Authority, Delhi … Respondent
Advocates/Authorized Representatives who appeared
| For the appellant | : None |
|---|---|
| For the respondent | : Shri D.S. Bisht, Joint Commissioner |
| CORAM | |
| JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH | : CHAIRMAN |
| MRS. ANANYA RAY | : MEMBER |
ORDER 23.02.2018
FPA-ND-81/DLI/2016
No one appeared on behalf of the appellant. Reply has been filed by
the respondent. Right to file the rejoinder is closed.
List on 17th August, 2018.
Both the parties are allowed to file the written synopsis.
(Justice Manmohan Singh) Chairman
(Ananya Ray) Member
New Delhi,
23rd February, 2018.
‘s’
FPA-81/DLI/2016
Page 1 of 1
Gurjeet Singh
The Competent Authority, Delhi
Manmohan Singh
Ananya Ray
As recorded by the court registry
11 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
