Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Z.A.HAQ, AMIT B.BORKAR
State of Maharashtra – Appellant
Versus
Sanjeev S/o Shankarrao Khade – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to attachment order initiated by state (Para 3 , 4) |
| 2. respondents claim ownership and funding sources for property (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. court finds lack of evidence supporting ownership claims (Para 7 , 8 , 14) |
| 4. challenges to financial evidence by respondents (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
JUDGMENT :
AMIT B. BORKAR, J.
1. Heard.
2. Admit.
3. Through this appeal, the State of Maharashtra has challenged the order passed by the District Judge-2 and Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur, thereby refusing to confirm attachment in respect of immovable property i.e. Flat No.101, First Floor, A Wing, Jayanti Mansion VI, Manish Nagar, Nagpur.
4. The Competent Authority under Section 5 (3) of the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 1999 (for short “MPID Act”) had attached properties of the respondent nos.1 and 2 by Notification dated 29.3.2016. The respondent no.1 was the Director of Financial Institution - M/s. Wetell Concept Pvt. Ltd. It is alleged by the prosecution that the Directors of the said Company had launched various schemes and promised high attractive rates of interest and received deposits from 161 depositors to the tu
The burden of proof to demonstrate lawful acquisition of property rests on the property owner, and failure to substantiate claims warrants confirmation of asset attachment.
Nominees do not hold exclusive ownership and may not shield inherited property from tax-related attachments against other heirs.
The MPIDFE Act allows for the attachment of property to protect the interests of depositors, regardless of when the property was acquired. The affidavit filed by the competent authority complied with....
Properties purchased with funds linked to a defaulting financial establishment can be attached under the Act, regardless of the source of those funds.
Point of law: Member of the Family" in relation to a Government employee, includes the spouse, son, daughter, step-son or step-daughter of such employee, whether residing with, such employee or not, ....
The court established that mere agreements or claims of ownership do not confer rights unless they comply with legal requirements, and that attachment orders can be upheld if the procedural requireme....
The attachment of property under the U.P. Gangsters Act requires a clear nexus between the property and criminal activities, which must be proven by the State.
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
