Allowed

FPA-FE-11/CHN/2011 of Sh. v. Bhaskaran & Ors. v/s The Special Director Directorate of Enforcement, Chennai

ATFP2 Jul 2019FPA-FE-11/CHN/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single Member Bench of the Appellate Tribunal allowed appellants a one-week extension to comply with a pre-deposit order of the Tribunal dated 5.12.2018, noting lack of high court stay and non-filing of jurisdiction challenge.

What did the court decide?

One week's time granted to comply with the Tribunal's order dated 5.12.2018 regarding pre-deposit.

FPA-FE-11/CHN/2011 of Sh. v. Bhaskaran & Ors. v/s The Special… — Banking and Recovery | ATFP (2019)

¶1

APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, FOREIGN EXCHANGE MANAGEMENT ACT AT NEW DELHI

¶2

1. FPA-FE-11/CHN/2011
Sh. V. Bhaskaran & Ors.	…	Appellant
Versus
The Special Director Directorate of Enforcement, Chennai	…	Respondent
2. FPA-FE-12/CHN/2011
Sh. V. Bhaskaran & Ors.	…	Appellant
Versus
The Special Director
Directorate of Enforcement, Chennai	…	Respondent
3. FPA-FE-13/CHN/2011
Sh. V. Bhaskaran & Ors.	…	Appellant
Versus
The Special Director Directorate of Enforcement, Chennai	…	Respondent
&
4. FPA-FE-14/CHN/2011
Sh. V. Bhaskaran & Ors.	…	Appellant
Versus
The Special Director
Directorate of Enforcement, Chennai	…	Respondent

¶3

Advocates/Authorized Representatives who appeared

¶4

For the Appellants : Mr. Ananta Prasad Mishra, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Gagan Gupta, Advocate For the Respondent : Sh. Kaushlesh Pandey, Legal Consultant on behalf of Sh. Prashant Pandey, Legal consultant CORAM SMT. ANANYA RAY : MEMBER ORDER 02.07.2019

¶5

FPA-FE-11-14/CHN/2011

¶6

The learned counsel for the appellants Sh. Ananta Prasad Mishra,

¶7

Advocate appeared on behalf of Mr. Gagan Gupta, Advocate. He stated

¶8

that they have challenged the Pre-deposit Order of this Bench dated

¶9

FPA-FE-11-14/CHN/2011

¶10

Page 1 of 2

¶11

5.12.2018 before the Hon’ble Madras High Court including the question of jurisdiction of the single Member bench.

¶12

The Hon’ble Madras High Court vide their order dated 12.06.2019, a copy of which was given in the court today, has not stayed the interim order of this Bench dated 5.12.2018 and mentioned that it could not be entertained. On the question of jurisdiction of the Single Member Bench, the court has left the matter open for the Tribunal to deal with it in accordance with the law.

¶13

Since, there is no stay from the Madras High Court, it is mandatory on the part of the appellants to comply with the order of this bench dated 5.12.2018 in which they were given two months’ time to pre-deposit. Almost seven months time has lapsed and even then they have failed to pre-deposit.

¶14

On the issue of jurisdiction, although the Madras High Court order is of 12.06.2019, they have till date filed no application in this Tribunal for hearing and processing of the same as indicated by the counsel for the appellants. It appears that the appellants are only keen to prolong the matter.

¶15

However, in the interest of justice, I am giving them another one weeks’ time from today to comply with this Benches’ order dated 5.12.2018 failing which action as per law will be taken. Pronounced in open court.

¶16

List for compliance on 11^th July, 2019.

¶17

(Ananya Ray) Member

¶18

New Delhi, 2^nd July, 2019 M

¶19

FPA-FE-11-14/CHN/2011

¶20

Page 2 of 2

FPA-FE-11/CHN/2011 of Sh. v. Bhaskaran & Ors. v/s The Special Director Directorate of Enforcement, Chennai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

FPA-FE-11/CHN/2011 of Sh. v. Bhaskaran & Ors. v/s The Special Director Directorate of Enforcement, Chennai

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