SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

DELHI HIGH COURT
PRATHIBA M.SINGH
Bliss Abode Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Zonal Office Directorate of Enforcement – Respondent


Table of Content
1. rights of parties regarding order supply and possession. (Para 3 , 4)
2. time limit for appeal and reasonable period for remedies. (Para 6 , 10 , 12)
3. requirements for delivery of orders and confirmations. (Para 7 , 8)
4. directions for fair administration of orders in future. (Para 13 , 14)

JUDGMENT

Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)--This hearing has been done by video conferencing.

2. The Petitioner has approached this Court by way of the present writ petition seeking two primary reliefs. Firstly, that a copy of order dated 1st January, 2021 passed under Section 8 (3) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (hereinafter `PMLA') be supplied to the Petitioner. Secondly, that the same may not be given effect to for a period of at least 45 days in order to enable the Petitioner to approach the Appellate Tribunal under Section 26 of the PMLA.

3. Mr. Siddharth Aggarwal, ld. counsel appearing for the Petitioner submits that it is unfortunate that the authority did not supply a copy of order dated 1st January, 2021, despite repeated requests and now, physical possession of the property, being 40, Amrita Shergill Marg, New Delhi-110003, is sought to be taken. He rel

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top