TMI Blog2021 (1) TMI 630X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... raised is left open. Further, in order to avoid such a dispute in future and to ensure fairness and non-arbitrariness, the Registrar of the Adjudicating Authority under the PMLA shall ensure that in future, all orders passed by the Adjudicating Authority, apart from being served in accordance with the provisions of the Act, Rules and Regulations, would also be uploaded on the website of the Adjudicating Authority within 48 hours from the date of the pronouncement. The Adjudicating Authority shall also fix a specific date for pronouncement of orders in open Court in terms of Regulation 27. Petition disposed off. - W.P.(C) 301/2021 & CM APPLs. 774/2021, 775/2021 - - - Dated:- 11-1-2021 - JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH Petitioner Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ay High Court b) B. Kamalam v. The Joint Director, Directorate of Enforcement Anr. [W.P.(C) 27451/2014, decided on 15th October, 2014] passed by the Madras High Court 4. Mr. Amit Mahajan, ld. counsel appearing for the Respondents submits that under Section 8(4) of the PMLA, once the provisional order of attachment is confirmed, the authorised Officer can take possession of the property forthwith. As per Rule 5(2) of the Prevention of Money Laundering (Taking Possession of Attached or Frozen Properties confirmed by the Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2013, only ten days notice is liable to be given before possession of the immovable property is taken by the Authorised Officer. Rule 5(2) of the Rules reads as under: 5. M ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order or direction quashing/setting aside/staying Notice bearing F. No. ECIR/MBZO-I/04/2020/PVP dated 07.01.2021 issued by Respondent Nos. 1-2 in ECIR/MBZOI/ 04/2020; and Pass any other order and/or further orders that this Hon ble Court may deem to be just, fair and equitable in the facts and circumstances of the case. 6. On the first aspect of serving of copies of orders passed by the authority, there can be no doubt that such orders ought to be made readily available to the parties concerned. The impugned order is stated to have been passed on 1st January 2021 and the present writ petition was filed on 8th January 2021. By the time of filing, at best, the Petitioner believes that the order was served on 7th January 2021 and the same ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ritten replies and rejoinders and the arguments above referred, I find that the immovable property provisionally attached by PAO No. 06/2020 dated 09.07.2020 i.e., immovable property to the extent of ₹ 307 Crore. (approximate value of the property is ₹ 685 Crore mentioned at page no - 2 of this order) is involved in money laundering. a. I, therefore, hereby confirm the attachment of the properties made under sub-section (1) of Section 5 of PMLA. I, therefore, order that the said Attachment shall continue during pendency of the proceedings relating to any offence under the prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002 before the Special Court; and become final after an order of confiscation is passed under Sub-section (5) or sub- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he ld. Counsel for the Petitioner has relied upon the decisions of the Madras High Court and the Bombay High Court mentioned above. In the decision of B. Kamalam (supra), the Madras High Court has categorically held that the period available for appeal under Section 26 (3) of the PMLA ought to be available to the party concerned, before physical possession is taken over. The relevant portion of the said judgment is set out below: 2. Under Section 26(3) of the Act, the petitioner has a right of appeal to the Tribunal. The limitation for filing an appeal is 45 days and it has not expired. However, the first respondent issued a notice of eviction on 10.10.2014. Therefore, the petitioner has come up with the above writ petition challenging ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce of eviction shall begin to run after the expiry of the period of 45 days prescribed for preferring the appeal, recently held that the notice of eviction would not be implemented for a period of 55 days from the date of service of the order of confirmation of attachment. 12. Mr. Agarwal, ld. Counsel, however submits that since the order has now been supplied to the Petitioner, he would not insist on a period of 45 days or 55 days being provided to the Petitioner. He submits that any reasonable period may be provided to enable the Petitioner to avail of its appellate remedy. Mr. Mahajan, ld. counsel, however submits that only a period of ten days ought to be provided as per the Rules. 13. In view of the submissions made by ld. Counse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
