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

2024 Supreme(Online)(ATFP) 2088

APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FORFEITED PROPERTY
M/s Guru Commodity Services Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement Mumbai – Respondent
FPA- PMLA-4642/MUM/2022



APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER SAFEMA AT NEW DELHI

1. MP-PMLA-9398/MUM/2022 (Stay)

FPA- PMLA-4596/MUM/2022 Pune District Central Co-OP Bank Ltd. … Appellant

2. MP-PMLA-9402/MUM/2022 (Stay)

FPA- PMLA-4598/MUM/2022 M/s Jarandeshwar Sugar Mills Pvt. Ltd. … Appellant

3. MP-PMLA-9481/MUM/2022 (Stay)

MP-PMLA-9482/MUM/2022 (Misc.)

FPA- PMLA-4642/MUM/2022 M/s Guru Commodity Services Pvt. Ltd. … Appellant Versus The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Mumbai. … Respondent Advocates/Authorized Representatives who appeared For the Appellant : Ms. Stuti Gujral, Mr. Joel Carlos, Ms. Tanu Jain, Mr. Vipin Kumar &

Mr. Dhanya Visweswaran, Ads.

(For Serial No.1)

Mr. Arshdeep Singh Khurana, Mr. Joel Carlos, Ms. Tannavi Sharma & Peeyush B., Advs.

(For Serial No.2)

Mr. Ashwani Taneja & Gunjan Chauhan, Advs.

(For Serial No.3)

For the Respondent : Mr. Aditya Singla & Mr. Raghav Bakshi, Advs.

CORAM JUSTICE MUNISHWAR NATH BHANDARI : CHAIRMAN SHRI BALESH KUMAR : MEMBER

FINAL ORDER

27.11.2024 By the batch of these appeals under Section 26 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (in short `the Act of 2002’), a challenge has been made to the order dated 29.03.2022 passed by the Adjudicating Authority confirming the Provisional Attachment Order dated 01.07.2021.

2. It is a case where a factory comprising of land, building, structures, plant, machinery, etc. belonging to M/s Guru Commodity Services Pvt. Ltd. has been attached. The property aforesaid is on lease to M/s Jarandeshwar Sugar Mills Pvt. Ltd. and mortgaged to Pune District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. This appeal has been preferred by all the parties named above.

3. The learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the appeal involves institutions within the co-operative banking and credit system in Maharashtra which functions with three-tier system in which first level is Primary Agricultural Credit Co- operative Societies, then comes District Central Co-operative Banks and lastly Maharashtra State Co-operative Bank. The Primary Agricultural Credit Co-operative Societies mobilize their funds to their members who are agriculturist and deploy it as crop loans to other needy members. In case, deposits are found to be insufficient to meet loan requirements of farmers, they rely on the federal structure at the District Level and finally at the State Level.

4. It is submitted that the present case relates to the borrowing of money from the Maharashtra State Co-operative Bank by M/s Jarandeshwar Sugar Mills Pvt. Ltd. The properties have been attached by the respondents mainly on the ground that in the year 2010, the Board of Directors of Maharashtra State Co- operative Bank sold the attached property by invoking SARFAESI, 2002 by undervaluing the reserve price. The reserve price was fixed at Rs.45 crores whereas as per the report, the value of the property was more than Rs.100 crores.

5. Further allegation was that the tender process for sale of the property was not conducted in a fair and proper manner. M/s Guru Commodity Services Pvt. Ltd. was not possessing the requisite financial capacity to participate in the tender and paid the bid amount of Rs.65.75 crores through funds arranged from proxy parties.

6. It is further submitted that in reference to the aforesaid allegations, a criminal complaint bearing R.C. No. 72/2011 was filed under Section 200 Cr.PC before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Koregaon, who vide its order dated 14.10.2011 took cognizance of the offence and issued summons. The said order of the learned Judicial Magistrate was challenged before the Additional Sessions Judge, Satara by maintaining a Revision Petition. The Revision Petition was allowed by the order dated 23.08.2012 and accordingly the order of the learned Judicial Magistrate and proceedings before it were set aside. On a challenge to the order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge by the other party, the Bombay High Court in Crl. Writ Petition Nos. 3657,3563/2012 refused to cause interference in the order and a

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top