The appellate tribunal listed a stay application FPA-PMLA-1956/DLI/2017 for hearing, requiring the respondent to file a reply and parties to submit written synopses within specified timelines.
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-2766/DLI/2016 (Stay) &
FPA-PMLA-1360/DLI/2016
Ram Prakash Bhatia … Appellant
Versus The Joint Director Directorate of Enforcement, Delhi
… Respondent
Advocates/Authorized Representatives who appeared
For the appellant : Shri Naveen Malhotra, Advocate For Respondent : Shri Nitesh Rana, Advocate CORAM JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH : CHAIRMAN SHRI G.C. MISHRA : MEMBER
ORDER 15.02.2018
FPA-PMLA-1956/DLI/2017
Reply has not been filed by the respondent. Mr. Nitesh Rana, learned counsel for the respondent seeks some more time. Let the same be done within four weeks with an advance copy to the learned counsel for the appellant who may file the rejoinder two weeks thereafter. Both the parties are allowed to file the written synopsis.
List on 18th July, 2018.
(Justice Manmohan Singh) Chairman
(G.C. Mishra) Member New Delhi, 15th February, 2018 ‘A’
FPA-PMLA-1360/DLI/2016
Page 1 of 1
Ram Prakash Bhatia
The Joint Director Directorate of Enforcement, Delhi
Manmohan Singh
G.C. Mishra
As recorded by the court registry
16 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
