TMI Blog2021 (11) TMI 1083X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he affidavit-in-opposition is not required to be filed or if the contesting respondents give away its right to file affidavit-in-opposition. The writ petition could not have been allowed with the finding and observations contained therein which may affect other litigants as well. That apart we find the learned writ Court after making such observations holding the appellant as a non-litigant has granted a direction in the penultimate paragraph of the impugned order with an observation that the order passed in the writ petition will not prevent the Adjudicating Authority from passing final order of adjudication in the pending proceeding in accordance with law which, according to the appellants, had already been concluded and final orders ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... isions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (in short PMLA ) questioning the order dated 1.10.2021 passed in WPA 11578/2021 (Gobinda Das ors. vs. Union of India ors.) filed by the respondent nos. 1, 2 3 herein, challenging that portion of the order holding that the appellant authorities are to permit the respondents/writ petitioners to operate the bank account and postal accounts by declaring the order of provisional attachment as having lost its efficacy as the confirmation order was not passed within a period of 180 days in terms of Section 5(3) of the Act. The appellant before us is contending that the learned Single Judge failed to consider the suo motu order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and had inter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... we have noted above, submitted that the appellant organization did not have the opportunity to file affidavit-in-opposition and interpretation given by the learned Single Judge treating the Adjudicating Authority as a non-litigant would have a far reaching consequence and also that the case in hand may be relied upon as a precedent in other matters. He further submitted that the effect of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in S. Kashi vs. State through the Inspector of Police Samaynallur Police Station, Madurai District reported in (2020) SCC Online Supreme Court 529 and Vikas WSP Ltd. vs. Directorate Enforcement reported in 2021 (376) ELT 201 (Del.) and other decisions relied upon by the respondent/writ petitioners are all ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , it will lose its efficacy and this is precisely what the learned Single Judge held. Further, it is submitted that the learned writ court had passed the order of 1.10.2021 and the appellants had filed the instant appeal on 7.10.2021 and notice of the appeal was served on the respondent nos. 1, 2 and 3 on 8.10.2021 and without giving an opportunity of hearing to the respondent/writ petitioners ex parte adjudicating order has been passed on 09.11.2021 and such order should be set aside and respondent/writ petitioners have to be heard and the matter is to be decided on merits. Further, with regard to allegations that the entire bank accounts of the respondent/writ petitioners have been freezed and one of such account in AXIS Bank, Madhyamg ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sidered view that the writ petition could not have been allowed with the finding and observations contained therein which may affect other litigants as well. That apart we find the learned writ Court after making such observations holding the appellant as a non-litigant has granted a direction in the penultimate paragraph of the impugned order with an observation that the order passed in the writ petition will not prevent the Adjudicating Authority from passing final order of adjudication in the pending proceeding in accordance with law which, according to the appellants, had already been concluded and final orders passed. The respondents/writ petitioners have not preferred an appeal against the said finding. Therefore the Adjudicating Au ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a decision as to whether the respondents had any adequate opportunity before the Adjudicating Authority while passing the final order of adjudication dated 9.11.2021. In the light of the above, the findings recorded by the learned writ Court whether the appellant is a nonlitigant needs to be vacated and, accordingly, stand vacated in its entirety. We are disturbed by the fact that though an order of attachment has been passed the learned counsel for the respondents/writ petitioners has demonstrated before us that one of the bank accounts has been debited to the tune of Rs.14 lacs leaving the balance amount as zero. It is not clear as to how the bank account of the writ petitioners/respondents could have been debited in its entirety. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
