TMI Blog2022 (6) TMI 1360X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER AND ANR. [ 2012 (2) TMI 621 - DELHI HIGH COURT] . It was held that the Division Bench clarified in a case where the original authority is in one State and the seat of the appellate authority is located in another State, a writ petition would be maintainable in both the Courts and also that it is the petitioner who has a right to choose his forum, which need to be respected. The Division Bench clarified that normally in such circumstances, writ petition would be maintainable at both the places and only in extreme cases where the Court finds that it is totally inconvenient for a Court to entertain the writ petition and the other High Court may be better equipped to deal with such a case then the doctrine ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... maintainable. Similar arguments are addressed in respect of W.P.(C) 7656/2022. Mr. Hossain submits that here too the petitioner is a company whose principal office is situate in the State of Karnataka and that the provisional order of attachment was also made by the competent authority situate in that State. In view of the aforesaid, it was submitted that bearing in mind the principles of forum conveniens as were propounded by the Division Bench of the Court in Aasma Mohammed Farooq, the two writ petitions are liable to be dismissed on this score alone. The attention of the Court has further been drawn to the order of 14 December 2018 in terms of which the Special Leave to Appeal taken against the judgment rendered by the Division Bench ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t is totally inconvenient for a Court to entertain the writ petition and the other High Court may be better equipped to deal with such a case then the doctrine of forum conveniens has to be applied. The directions of the Sterling Agro (supra) have to be understood in that manner alone, otherwise it would be negation of the principle stated in Kusum Ingots (supra), particularly paras 25 to 27 thereof .. (Emphasis provided by this Court) 10. In other words, the Division Bench clarified in a case where the original authority is in one State and the seat of the appellate authority is located in another State, a writ petition would be maintainable in both the Courts and also that it is the petitioner who has a right to choose ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... further in terms of Section 8 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 [PMLA] as more than 180 days have lapsed since the passing of the provisional order of attachment. It is in that backdrop that learned has placed reliance on the decision rendered by a learned Judge of the Court in Vikas WSP and Others vs. Directorate Enforcement and Another [2020 SCC Online Del 1732]. Although the decision in Vikas WSP forms subject matter of pending LPA No. 362/2020, the Division Bench, in that appeal has also extended interim protection. 5. In view of the aforesaid facts, this Court is of the opinion that since the Appellate Forum has already been approached and the petitioner in W.P.(C) 6354/2022 stands deprived of his right to pursue t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er requires consideration. 2. Parties shall consequently maintain status quo till the next date of listing. 3. List on 04.11.2022 . CM APPL. 23484/2022 (Interim Direction) in W.P.(C) 7656/2022 1. Notice. Since the respondents are duly represented by learned counsel, let a counter affidavit be filed within a period of six weeks. 2. For the purposes of considering the prayer for interim directions, the Court notes that the judgment in Vikas WSP and Others vs. Directorate Enforcement and Another [2020 SCC Online Del 1732] passed by a learned Judge of the Court has clearly held that the Adjudicating Authority would stand rendered as functus officio , once the period of 180 days expires. Although that petition forms subj ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
