FPA-PMLA-1845/MUM/2017 of Manohar Krishna Madhavi v/s The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Mumbai

ATFP15 Oct 2018FPA-PMLA-1845/MUM/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This matter concerns a fresh appeal filed under Section 26 of the PMLA, 2002. The appellant complained of irregular service of notice, resulting in no coercive steps being taken pending the next date of hearing.

What did the court decide?

No coercive steps to be taken till next date of hearing; accidently leave granted to issue notice.

FPA-PMLA-1845/MUM/2017 of Manohar Krishna Madhavi v/s The Deputy… — Money Laundering | ATFP (2018)

¶1

APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PREVENTION OF MONEY LAUNDERING ACT AT NEW DELHI

¶2

MP-PMLA-3619/MUM/2017(Stay) &

¶3

FPA-PMLA-1845/MUM/2017

¶4

Manohar Krishna Madhavi … Appellant/Applicant Versus The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Mumbai … Respondent

¶5

Advocates/Authorized Representatives who appeared

¶6

For the Appellant : Dr. Shamshuddin, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Neeraj Atri, Advocate

¶7

CORAM JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH : CHAIRMAN

¶8

ORDER

¶9

15.10.2018

¶10

FPA-PMLA-1845/MUM/2017

¶11

An urgent matter has been mentioned whereby an order dated 09^th

¶12

October, 2017 has been referred, the same is reproduced here below:

¶13

“FPA-PMLA-1845/MUM/2017

¶14

Fresh appeal has been filed under section 26 of PMLA, 2002 against the order dated 31^st March, 2017. Issue notice to the respondent. Mr. Atri, accepts the notice on behalf of the respondent. He seeks four weeks time to file the reply. Let the reply be filed within four weeks with an advance copy to the counsel for the appellant who may file the rejoinder within four weeks thereafter.

¶15

MP-PMLA-3619/MUM/2017(Stay)

¶16

Alongwith the appeal the application for stay has also been filed by the learned counsel for the appellant; the notice under section 8(4) has not been received. As far as notice under section 8(4) is issued by the respondent the counsel for the appellant may pressing the interim order within the prescribed time.

¶17

In the meanwhile, the respondent issue notice under section 8(4) to the appellant, a copy thereof is sent to the counsel for the appellant who may file the urgent hearing of the application.

¶18

List on 18^th December, 2017. ”

¶19

FPA-PMLA-1845/MUM/2017

¶20

Page 1 of 2

¶21

Counsel for the appellant states that despite the directions no copy be served to the learned counsel for the appellant. It was only served to the appellant dated 12^th October, 2018.

¶22

The appeal is coming up on 19^th November, 2018.

¶23

In the meanwhile, no coercive steps shall be taken by the respondent till the next date of hearing as agreed between the parties.

¶24

(Justice Manmohan Singh) Chairman

¶25

New Delhi,

¶26

15^th October, 2018

¶27

‘AS’

¶28

FPA-PMLA-1845/MUM/2017

¶29

Page 2 of 2

FPA-PMLA-1845/MUM/2017 of Manohar Krishna Madhavi v/s The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Mumbai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

FPA-PMLA-1845/MUM/2017 of Manohar Krishna Madhavi v/s The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Mumbai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases