APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA AT NEW DELHI

1. MP-PMLA-10805/HYD/2023 Exmp.

MP-PMLA-10777/HYD/2023 Stay FPA-PMLA-5386/HYD/2023 Axis Bank Ltd. … Appellant Versus The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Hyderabad … Respondent

2. MP-PMLA-1894/HYD/2025 (Intervention)

MP-PMLA-10785/HYD/2023 (Exemp.)

MP-PMLA-10784/HYD/2023 (Stay)

FPA-PMLA-5395/HYD/2023 HDFC Bank ltd. … Appellant Versus The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Hyderabad … Respondent

3. MP-PMLA-1895/HYD/2025 (Intervention)

FPA-PMLA-5409/HYD/2023 M/s ICICI Bank … Appellant Versus The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Hyderabad … Respondent

4. MP-PMLA-1893/HYD/2025 (Intervention)

MP-PMLA-1892/HYD/2025(Intervention)

FPA-PMLA-5424/HYD/2023 Bajaj Finance Ltd. … Appellant Versus The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Hyderabad … Respondent

5. MP-PMLA-1891/HYD/2025 (Intervention)

MP-PMLA-11210/HYD/2023 Exmp.

MP-PMLA-11208/HYD/2023 Stay FPA-PMLA-5638/HYD/2023 Aditya Birla Finance Limited … Appellant Versus The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Hyderabad … Respondent Advocates/Authorized Representatives who appeared For the Appellant : Mr. Arjun Garg, Ms. Sagun Srivastava, Mr. Sourabh Rath, Mr. Aman Raj, Mr. P. SS Bhargava, Mr. Madhav Kurana, Ms. Shally Basin, Mr. Prateek Yadav, Ms. Rachna Dubey, Ms. Kashvi, Mr. Jaiveer Shergil, Mr. Gaurav Gupta, Advocates For the Respondent : Mr. Tanvir Ahmed Mir, Adv.

Mr. Sandeep Das, Adv.

Mr. Soham Goswami, Adv. Mr. Tejasvi Mahajan, Adv.

CORAM JUSTICE MUNISHWAR NATH BHANDARI : CHAIRMAN SHRI V. ANANDARAJAN : MEMBER

FINAL ORDER

22.05.2025 The batch of appeals have been filed by the Financial Institutions to challenge the order dated 01.12.2022 passed by the Adjudicating Authority confirming the provisional attachment order dated 08.3.2022. It is a case where Central Crime Station Hyderabad registered two FIRs against M/s Karvy Stock Broking Limited (KSBL) and its Director on 22.04.2021 an another FIR dated 01-05-2021 against M/s Karvy Comtrade Limited and its Director for the offence under Section 420 IPC based on the complaint filed by the one Srinivas Ayyagari Vice President of HDFC Bank, Hyderabad.

It was alleged that M/s KSBL, its Directors and employees dishonestly and fraudulently availed the bank loan despite being illegible and thereupon diverted the amount to various shell firms and related companies and thereby misused the loan funds. The charge sheet in reference to the FIR has been filed.

The appeal has been filed by the Appellant Financial Institution due to the attachment of the mortgage property. It is submitted that borrower while taking the loan had mortgaged the properties now attached by the respondent.

Due to the attachment of the properties, the Appellant Financial Institution are unable to recover their due amount and accordingly, they filed the appeal. It is submitted that serious allegations exist against the borrower to cause fraud and cheating with the appellant bank and now with the attachment of the mortgage property, institutions have become victim even in the hands of the respondents as they cannot recover the due amount of loan by auction of the property.

This Tribunal has realized that in those cases where serious allegations exist against the borrower and related parties for commission of fraud and cheating with the financial institution in obtaining the loan and thereupon siphoning off, the ED should try to reach to the proceeds of crime and attach it. It is only when they are unable to reach to the proceeds than to attach the property of the equivalent value. It is invariably seen that the respondents do not try to reach to the proceeds of crime at the first instance and it is only if they remain unsuccessful, to cause attachment of mortgage property otherwise the appellant financial institution becomes victim even in the hands of the respondent.

In the background aforesaid, we asked the Counsel for the Appellant as to why they have not resorted to remedy under Sections 8 (7) and 8 (8)