Home Case Index All Cases Money Laundering Money Laundering + AT Money Laundering - 2019 (12) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (12) TMI 810 - AT - Money LaunderingRestoration of application - withdrawal of vakalatnama by earlier lawyer - eviction notice - no sale of the properties which have been attached by the ED has taken place - HELD THAT:- The order of the Tribunal dated 17.7.2017 clearly mentions that the advocate appearing on behalf of the appellants had withdrawn his vakalatnama and it is recorded that he had already intimated to his client who shall make necessary arrangement to represent his case - Thereafter the case was fixed for hearing at least on four occasions almost covering a span of one year, but no one ever appeared. However soon after the case was dismissed for non prosecution on 07.09.2018, it is seen that the appellants filed the Restoration applications on 24.09.2018, within 17 days of the dismissed order. This does point out the intention of the appellants of deliberately not appearing on the previous occasions, so that the matter could get prolonged. The plea of the appellant Sh. Anosh Ekka’s counsel that the appellant was in jail does not hold much ground as there are at least 9-10 other appellants as listed above who also did not appear and most of them are related to Sh. Anosh Ekka. Even today Sh. Anosh Ekka is in jail as stated by the counsel for the appellant but nevertheless he has been able to appoint a new lawyer - The conduct of the appellant as brought out by the respondent and which was not controverted by any documents or evidence especially the fact of selling off the attached properties under PMLA only points towards the dis-regard of law by the appellants. Justice is qua both the parties. There are no reason to allow the ROA applications - ROA application dismissed.
|