Appellate Tribunal listed multiple First Appeal filings under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act for disposal. Parties were allowed to file written synopses by the next date as reply was not complete on record.
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
| FPA-PMLA-1881/LKW/2017 Sh. Jambu Prasad Jain |
… | Appellant |
|---|---|---|
| FPA-PMLA-1882/LKW/2017 | ||
| Smt. Reetu Jain | … | Appellant |
| FPA-PMLA-1883/LKW/2017 |
||
| Smt. Swati Jain | … | Appellant |
| FPA-PMLA-1884/LKW/2017 | ||
| Sh. Sanjay Jain | … | Appellant |
| FPA-PMLA-1886/LKW/2017 | ||
| Sh. Pankaj Jain | … | Appellant |
| FPA-PMLA-1892/LKW/2017 | ||
| ICICI Bank Limited | … | Appellant |
| MP-PMLA-3750/LKW/2017 Stay | ||
| FPA-PMLA-1902/LKW/2017 | ||
| Naresh Kumar Garg & Anr | … | Appellant |
| MP-PMLA-3750/LKW/2017 Stay | ||
| FPA-PMLA-1903/LKW/2017 | ||
| NKG Infrastructure and Anr. | … | Appellant |
| MP-PMLA-3756/LKW/2017 Stay | ||
| FPA-PMLA-1904/LKW/2017 | ||
| Vinod Kumar Goel | … | Appellant |
| MP-PMLA-3757/LKW/2017 Stay FPA-PMLA-1905/LKW/2017 |
||
| Tirupati Construction | … | Appellant |
| FPA-PMLA-1906/LKW/2017 | ||
| Parminder Kumar Tyagi | … | Appellant |
| Versus | ||
| The Joint Director | ||
| Directorate of Enforcement, Lucknow | … | Respondent |
Advocates/Authorized Representatives who appeared
| For the appellant | : Shri Parmatma Singh, Advocate Shri Amaresh Kumar, Advocate |
|---|---|
| For the respondent | : Shri Nitesh Rana, Advocate |
| CORAM | |
| JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH | : CHAIRMAN |
| SMT. ANANYA RAY | : MEMBER |
FPA-PMLA-1881-1884/LKW/2017 & FPA-PMLA-1886, 1892 & 1902-1906/LKW/2017
Page 1 of 2
ORDER 12.01.2018
FPA-PMLA-1881-1884/LKW/2017 and FPA-PMLA-1886, 1892 & 1902-1906/LKW/2017
Reply is not on record. The counsel for the respondent states that the reply is ready and he would be filing the same in the registry during the course of the day. The counsel for the appellant submits that as per record no counter report to the IIT report or any expert opinion is available. The copy of the reply has been served to the counsel for the appellant who does not want to file the rejoinder. Both the parties are allowed to file the written synopsis by the next date.
List on 6th April, 2018.
(Justice Manmohan Singh) Chairman
(Ananya Ray) Member
New Delhi, 12th January, 2018.
‘K’
FPA-PMLA-1881-1884/LKW/2017 & FPA-PMLA-1886, 1892 & 1902-1906/LKW/2017
Page 2 of 2
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to allow parties to file written synopses after finding reply was not on record.
Whether to fix date for next listing.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sh. Jambu Prasad Jain
Smt. Reetu Jain
Smt. Swati Jain
Sh. Sanjay Jain
Sh. Pankaj Jain
ICICI Bank Limited
Manmohan Singh
Ananya Ray
As recorded by the court registry
13 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
