Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
B. P. COLABAWALLA, SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN
Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement – Appellant
Versus
Branch Manager, The Goa State Co-op Bank Ltd. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
[Per: B. P. COLABAWALLA, J ]
1. The above Appeal is filed under Section 42 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 [for short the “PMLA, 2002”] by the Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement, challenging the order dated 4th July 2018 passed by the Appellate Tribunal [constituted under the provisions of the PMLA, 2002], in FPA-PMLA-2178/AHD/2018. By the impugned order, the Appellate Tribunal allowed the Appeal filed by the Respondent-Bank against the order of the Adjudicating Authority confirming the Provisional Order of the Attachment levied [under Section 5 of the PMLA, 2002] by the Deputy Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Surat.
2. Since there is a delay in filing the Appeal, the above Interim Application is also filed seeking a condonation of delay. Though in the Interim Application, the period of delay is not mentioned, on the basis of the lists of dates and events tendered to this Court on 9th December 2024, the delay mentioned is 132 days.
3. As recorded in our order dated 9th December, 2024, we had noted that the issue involved in the present case is whether the Court has the power to condone the delay beyond the total period of 120 days [sixty days
The court ruled that it cannot condone delay beyond 120 days in appeals under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, as Section 5 of the Limitation Act is expressly excluded.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the time limit prescribed under section 42 of the Prevention of Money-laundering Act, 2002 is absolute and cannot be extended by invoking sect....
The court ruled that strict compliance with statutory time limits is mandatory, and substantial justice cannot override clear legislative provisions regarding delay in filing appeals.
The court ruled that under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Act, 2013, appeals must be filed within 120 days, and the court has no power to condone delays beyond th....
The court ruled that under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Act, 2013, appeals must be filed within 120 days, and the court has no power to condone delays beyond th....
Appeals under NIA Act Section 21(5) filed beyond maximum 90 days are not maintainable; delay uncondonable as provision mandatory, excluding Limitation Act Section 5 application.
The High Court lacks the authority to condone delay beyond the statutory period prescribed under FEMA, which excludes the application of Section 5 of the Limitation Act.
The High Court lacks authority to condone delays exceeding 120 days under Section 42 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
