Non-substantive order granting the respondent four weeks to file a reply against an objection to file a rejoinder within two weeks, with a subsequent listing date.
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 SAFEMA, FEMA, NDPS, PMLA & PBPT ACT AT NEW DELHI
MP-PMLA-6114/DLI/2019 (A.G.) & FPA-PMLA-2549/DLI/2018 Shri Anup Prakash Garg … Appellant Versus The Deputy Director, Directorate of Enforcement, New Delhi … Respondent
Advocates/Authorized Representatives who appeared
For the Appellant : Mr. V. Govinda Ramanan, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Nitesh Rana, S. P. P. Mr. A. R. Aditya, Advocate CORAM MS. ANANYA RAY : MEMBER
ORDER 18.07.2019
The ld. counsel for the respondent states that they were not able to file the reply to the MP-PMLA-6114/DLI/2019 for additional grounds and seeks further four weeks time. The ld. counsel for the appellant objects the prayer and states that these are purely legal issue.
In the interest of justice, I am inclined to give one more opportunity to the respondent to file the reply. Let the same be done within four weeks from today with an advance copy to the counsel for the appellant. Another two weeks time is given to the appellant to file the rejoinder, if any.
List on 25th October, 2019.
(Ananya Ray) Member
New Delhi, 18th July, 2019
‘s’ FPA-PMLA-2549/DLI/2018
Page 1 of 1
Shri Anup Prakash Garg
The Deputy Director, Directorate of Enforcement, New Delhi
MS ANANYA RAY
As recorded by the court registry
13 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
