Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, G.ARUL MURUGAN
P. Shiva Kumar, GPA Holder of M/s. Advaith – Appellant
Versus
Directorate of Enforcement – Respondent
ORDER :
MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, C.J.
1. Heard on the application seeking condonation of delay of 116 days in filing the appeal.
2. Learned counsel for the applicant/appellant would submit that the delay occurred as the appellant was indisposed and on recuperation, he promptly filed the appeal.
3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent, referring to the provisions of Section 42 of the Prevention of Money- laundering Act, 2002 [PMLA] would submit the appeal should be filed within 60 days from the date of communication of the order and the said period, on showing sufficient cause, is extendable for a further period not exceeding 60 days. As the appellant failed to file the appeal within the stipulated period and no sufficient cause is shown, the delay in filing cannot be condoned.
4. Before adverting to the merits of the submissions made on either side, it is seemly to reproduce Section 42 of the PMLA hereunder:
“42. Appeal to High Court—
Any person aggrieved by any decision or order of the Appellate Tribunal may file an appeal to the High Court within sixty days from the date of communication of the decision or order of the Appellate Tribunal to him on any question of law
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 High Court lacks authority to condone delays exceeding 120 days under Section 42 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.
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.
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
