Contact us   Feedback   Annual Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2014 (5) TMI 1126 - DELHI HIGH COURT

2014 (5) TMI 1126 - DELHI HIGH COURT - TMI - Validity of lease deed executed after the Provisional Attachment - Attachment orders - money-laundering prevention - Held that:- Adjudicating Authority has the power to issue a provisional attachment order so that during the pendency of the proceedings, the property is neither transferred nor disposed of or parted with or dealt with in any manner. Subsequently, if upon a complaint being filed by respondent No.1, the provisional attachment order is con .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

sition or movement of property by an order issued under Chapter III. - Though in the present case, it has been averred that the tenancy had been orally created on 01st June, 2013, yet this Court is of the view that the alleged oral tenancy would create no right either in favour of the petitioner or respondent No.2 as the lease deed in question was compulsorily registerable under Section 17 of the Registration Act, 1908.Further, the covenant in the lease deed that security deposit shall be pa .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n question had been executed only after the Provisional Attachment order had been passed by the statutory authority, this Court is of the view Rule 5(3) of the Rules, 2013 would not enure to the benefit of either the petitioner or respondent No.2-tenant. - W.P.(C) 3170/2014 - Dated:- 19-5-2014 - MANMOHAN, J Appellants Rep by: Mr. Amit Sibal, Senior Adv. with Mr. Gurpreet Singh and Mr. Shakhir Husein, Advs. Respondents Rep by: Mr. Udit Gupta and Mr. Prasouk Jain, Advs for Mr. B.V. Niren, Adv. JUD .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n by respondent No.1 was contrary to Rule 5(3) of the Prevention of Money Laundering (Taking Possession of Attached or Frozen Properties Confirmed by the Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2013, (for short Rules, 2013 ) formulated by the Central Government in exercise of its power conferred by Sub-section (1) read with Clause (ee) of Subsection (2) of Section 73 of the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002 (for short Act, 2002 ). Rule 5(3) of the Rules, 2013 reads as under:- 5. Manner of taking p .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Sibal, further submits that as the property was let out to Ms. Amrita Rai, Advocate, who is enjoying the status of statutory tenant by virtue of duly registered lease deed dated 26th December, 2013, respondent No.1 could not have taken over possession without issuing notice to respondent No.2. 4. Upon a perusal of the paper book, the facts that are relevant to the present case are that on 30th August, 2013, a provisional attachment order under Section 5(1) of the Act, 2002 was passed by responde .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ed, disposed, parted with or otherwise dealt with in any manner, whatsoever, until or unless specially permitted to do so by the undersigned. Relied upon documents are mentioned in Annexure 'A'. 5. On 24th September, 2013, respondent No.1 filed a complaint under Section 5(5) of the Act, 2002. 6. On 26th December, 2013, according to petitioner, registered lease deed was executed between the petitioner and respondent No.2. The relevant provisions of the lease deed are reproduced hereinbelo .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

x 4. Provided and it is hereby agreed by and between the lessor and the lessee as follows: i. That the LESSEE shall pay to the LESSOR a Security Deposit of a sum of ₹ 1,60,000/- (Rupees One Lac Sixty Thousand Only), equivalent to two months rent, vide Cheque bearing No.068733, dated 26.12.2013, Drawn on IDBI Bank, Allahabad and the LESSEE has also paid the LESSOR a sum of ₹ 1,40,000/- (Rupees One Lac Forty Thousand Only), till now @ ₹ 4,20,000/- (Rupees Four Lacs and Twenty Tho .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ESSOR, failing which such amounts shall be deducted from the security deposit. (emphasis supplied) 7. On 26th February, 2014, the provisional attachment order was confirmed by respondent No.1. The relevant portion of the provisional attachment order reads as under:- 16. Therefore, I order for confirmation of the attachment of the properties made under sub-section (1) of Section 5 of the PML Act and this order shall (a) continue during the pendency of the proceedings relating to any offence under .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e intent and object of the Act, 2002 is to prevent money-laundering and to provide for confiscation of property derived from, or involved in. 10. Having regard to the intent and scheme of the Act, 2002 as well as the Rules, 2013, this Court is of the opinion that the Adjudicating Authority has the power to issue a provisional attachment order so that during the pendency of the proceedings, the property is neither transferred nor disposed of or parted with or dealt with in any manner. Subsequentl .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

pant to pay the lease amount or rent in the form of demand draft to respondent No.1. 11. This Court is further of the view that after a provisional attachment order has been passed, no noticee-owner can create a tenancy or transfer possession or create third party rights to defeat an ultimate order of taking over possession under the Act, 2002 and Rules, 2013. It is pertinent to mention that the expression attachment is defined under Section 2(d) of Act, 2002 to mean prohibition of transfer, con .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

95) 6 SCC 520 the Supreme Court has held that since the duration of lease is more than a year, it is an instrument and compulsorily registrable by operation of Section 18(1)(c) of the Registration Act and liable to stamp duty under the Indian Stamp Act. Therefore, it cannot be acted upon unless it is duly engrossed with stamp duty and registered. 13. Further, the covenant in the lease deed that security deposit shall be paid not at the time of handing over of possession or at the time of registr .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

cution of any deed including a sale deed in disobedience of an interim order of the Court is a nullity. Some of the relevant judgments are reproduced herein below:- (i) In Krishna Kumar Khemka vs. Grindlays Bank P.L.C.(1990) 3 SCC 669, it has been held as under:- 16. …..Therefore the tenancy created in favour of the Tatas was in breach of the order of the Court and consequently the Tatas cannot claim any protection under the provisions of the Act and they are liable to be evicted. &hellip .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version