TMI Blog2019 (7) TMI 960X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been filed, the same would constitute a sufficient reason within the meaning of Order 47 Rule 1 CPC for this Tribunal to review its earlier decision. This Tribunal is empowered to confirm, modify or set-aside the order appealed under Section 26(4) of the Act. - MP-PMLA-6059/CHN/2019(Review) And FPA-PMLA-2498/CHN/2018 - - - Dated:- 18-7-2019 - Justice Manmohan Singh Chairman And Shri G.C. Mishra Member For the Appellant : Shri Nikhil Rohtagi, Advocate Advocate, Shri Shashank Khurana, Advocate For the Respondent : Mohammad Faraz, Advocate, Mr. Nikhil Pillai Mr. Krishna Datta Multani, Advocates, Mr. Manoranjan Sharma, Advocate, Mr. Siddhartha Aggarwal and Mr. Nikhil Pillai, Advocates ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nder Order XLVII Rule 1, if any case is made out, the prayer can be allowed. 6. The following are the grounds, inter-alia, available to review its own order:- a) Discovery of new or important matter or evidence which the applicant could not produce at the time of initial decision despite exercise of due diligence, or the same was not within his knowledge; or b) The order to be reviewed suffers from some mistake or error apparent on the face of the record; or c) There exists some other reason, which, in the opinion of the Tribunal, is sufficient for reviewing the earlier order/decision. 7. Counsel for the appellant has referred number of decisions, the same ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ake or for any other sufficient reason. It was further held that the words sufficient reason in order XLVII Rule 1 are wide enough to include misconception of fact or law by a Court. It was further held that if the Court finds that the error pointed out in the review petition was under a mistake and the earlier judgment would not have been passed but for an erroneous assumption which in fact did not exist and its perpetration shall result is miscarriage of justice, nothing would preclude the Court from rectifying the error. 8. It is submitted by Mr. Rohtagi that, as explained hereinabove, the Tribunal can review its order/decision not just on the basis of the error apparent on the face of the record, as stated herein-abov ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xtraordinary relief given to the Plaintiff, in appropriate cases where the Court finds a strong prima facie case in favour of the Plaintiff and if the Court is satisfied that the defendant is likely to defeat the decree in future as and when it is passed. It was however clarified that the Court shall order withdrawal of attachment when the suit is dismissed. 10. It is stated on behalf of applicant that ED has neither made out a prima facie case nor has the ED been able to satisfy the Court that the Petitioner herein is likely or trying to dispose of the property. Further, this Tribunal has already come to the conclusion that there were no proceeds of crime and therefore no money laundering, and in such circumstances, there ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gone through the entire gamut of the matter, this Tribunal felt that while passing the final order, the condition imposed in the interim stage should also to be imposed as the appellant purchased the land after loan from bank/financial institution. Therefore, in the interest of purchasers of flats and banks, the said condition was imposed. 15. The appellant/applicant has not challenged our order, rather the same has been challenged by the ED as informed. 16. As far as filing of closure report by CBI is concerned, it is true that the respondent no. 1 has registered ECIR on the basis of allegation made by CBI. The said closure report has not attained finality. Either the appellant should hav ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
