Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
Alkarsf Apparels Private Limited Thiruvananthapuram – Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge of provisional attachment notice. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. counterarguments regarding legal standing and notices. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 3. analysis of the validity of the provisional attachment. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
JUDGMENT :
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
Petitioners challenge Exhibit-P9 notice and also seek a restraint on proceedings against any recovery action against them for the alleged fraud committed by the fourth respondent.
2. The first petitioner is a private limited company, while the second petitioner claims to be its Managing Director. On 15.11.2024, petitioners were served with Exhibit-P9 notice issued by the Village Officer, stating that the District Collector, by proceedings dated 11.09.2024, provisionally attached the property situated in re-survey No.311/1 of Block No.10 of Menamkulam Village, presently included in the Apparel Park of Kerala Industrial Infrastructure Development Corporation ( for short ‘the KINFRA’).
3. The basis for issuing Exhibit-P9 was stated as proceedings initiated against entities by name ‘M/s. Nirmal Krishna Ltd./Nirmal Krishna Benefit Fund Ltd.’ under the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Scheme
Provisional attachments under the BUDS Act must be confirmed by the Designated Court within statutory timelines; failure to do so renders the attachment invalid.
The court found a procedural violation in not issuing statutory notices for asset attachment but allowed re-evaluation of the case, emphasizing the principles of natural justice while establishing th....
The provisions of Section 14(1) of the BUDS Act exclude the application of Section 5 of the Limitation Act, meaning that any delay in filing for confirmation of attachment beyond the specified period....
The Designated Court under the OPID Act is not required to identify affected persons or quantify the money for equitable distribution, as per the provisions of the OPID Act.
Provisional attachment of bank accounts under GST Section 83 is invalid absent recorded opinion based on tangible material showing necessity to protect revenue; strict compliance mandatory, non-adher....
Judicial review mandates hearing all parties with interests in property before confirming attachment orders under PMLA.
Provisional attachment under Section 83 of GST Act invalid without proper officer forming and recording opinion, based on tangible material, that it is necessary for revenue protection prior to order....
The Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act allows for the attachment and sale of property to ensure repayment to depositors without requiring a prior conviction of the deposit takers.
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
