9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (7) TMI 474X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d. Therefore, this Court is unable to arrive at any definite conclusion as to whether notices addressed to the minor defendants were received by whom. It is also not clear from the counter affidavit as well as the additional counter affidavit sworn to on behalf of the 1st respondent. Be that as it may, the four sons of the petitioner did not join with the petitioner challenging the legality of the procedure adopted by the 1st respondent as to their array as parties in the complaint and to the services of notices. Therefore, this Court is not in a position to grant the relief to them. Insofar as the petitioner is concerned, this Court is of the opinion that the notice u/s.8[1] of PMLA has been properly served on him and his counsel had also entered appearance. - Writ petition dismissed - Decided against the petitioner. - WP. No. 16166/2016 & WMP. No. 13951/2016 - - - Dated:- 5-7-2016 - M. Sathyananarayanan, J. For the Petitioner : Mr. K. Sridhar For the Respondents : M/s. G. Hema ORDER By consent, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal. 2 The petitioner in the affidavit filed in support of this writ petition, avers as follows : - [a] The 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Preventive Detention Orders passed against the petitioner, were also quashed by this Court. Insofar as the ill-gotten money amazed through illegal activities which resulted in purchase of 8 items of properties, the purchases were effected between 01.07.2005 and 21.11.2011 and it has nothing to do with case in Crime No.573/2013 registered by R-7, K.K.Nagar Police Station, Chennai City. The 1st respondent despite the above un-controverted fact, had provisionally attached the properties standing in the names of the petitioner and his four minor children and according to the petitioner, there is no nexus between 21 cases and 8 properties sought to be attached and the criminal cases were between the years 1992 and 1997 and 2002 and the properties in question were acquired between 2005 and 2011 and there were no cases pending against the petitioner. [d] The petitioner is an Income Tax Assessee right from the year 1998 and the properties mentioned in Items No.1, 6, 7 and 8, referred to in the complaint filed under PMLA, were purchased from and out of the self earning and borrowings and the said particulars are also clearly reflected in the Income Tax Returns filed by the petitioner, so ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... omplaint No.552/2016 in the Provisional Attachment Order No.3/2016 in ECIR No.EZO/3/2013 [APS] dated 17.02.2016. 3 Mr.K.Sridhar, learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to section 8[1] of PMLA and would vehemently contend that as per section 8[1], notice is to be served in time of not less than 30 days on such person, calling upon him to indicate the sources of his income, earning or assets, out of which or by means of which, he has acquired the property attached under section 5[1] or, seized or frozen under sections 17 or 18 and furnish other particulars and also to show cause as to why all or any of such properties should not be declared to be the properties involved in money laundering and confiscated by the Central Government and admittedly, the notice mandated under the said provision has not been served on the petitioner and only when his counsel entered appearance, he was directed to take notice and to file the reply statements in the said proceedings by 06.06.2016, which is unknown to law. 3A It is the further submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, while drawing the attention of this Court to the Original complaint No.55 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lly attached vide Provisional Attachment Order [PAO] No.11/2014 dated 28.07.2014, as it relates to proceeds of the crime involved in the offence of money laundering and the complaint dated 14.08.2014 was also filed before the Adjudicating Authority under PMLA and it was confirmed by the said authority vide order dated 28.10.2014 in OC.No.345/2014. Learned Standing counsel for the respondents would further contend that the petitioner had purchased several immovable properties in his name and in the names of his dependent family members and also constructed few luxury apartments and bungalows with swimming pool worth several crores and on perusal of the Income Tax Returns submitted by the petitioner, he has declared a very meager income and the above said purchase of the immovable properties is highly disproportionate to the income earned as per his returns. Insofar as non-service of notice is concerned, in paragraphs 10, 12 and 13 of the counter affidavit, it is stated that the Show Cause Notice u/s.8[1] of PMLA was dispatched to the petitioner and to his minor sons vide speed post Nos.726 to 730 on 18.02.2016 and therefore, the procedural formalities were fully complied with and th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ection 5, or applications made under sub-section [4] of section 17 or under sub-section [10] of section 18, if the Adjudicating Authority has reason to believe that any person has committed an offence under section 3 or is in possession of proceeds of crime, it may serve a notice of not less than thirty days on such person calling upon him to indicate the sources of his income, earning or assets, out of which or by means of which he has acquired the property attached under sub-section [1] of section 5, or seized [or frozen], under section 17 or section 18, the evidence on which he relies an other relevant information and particulars, and to show cause why all or any of such properties should not be declared to be the properties involved in money-laundering and confiscated by the Central Government. Provided that where a notice under this sub-section specifies any property as being held by a person on behalf of any other person, a copy of such notice shall also be served upon such other person ; Provided further that where such property is held jointly by more than one person, such notice shall be served to all persons holding such property. 8 In section 8[1] of PMLA, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8[1] of PMLA dated 02.03.2016 is enclosed and according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, it was dispatched on 26.04.2016 to the minor sons of the petitioner and a per the Detailed Track Events, the said Notices were delivered on 27.04.2016 and it was a due and proper compliance. 11 The present writ petition is filed by the petitioner alone and not by his four minor sons represented by the next friend and natural guardian. A perusal of the additional counter affidavit coupled with the typed set of documents filed on behalf the respondents would disclose that section 8[1] notices were dispatched to the petitioner as well as to his minor sons on 14.03.2016 and were delivered on 22.03.2016 and once again, notices under the said provision were dispatched to the minor sons of the petitioner alone on 22.04.2016 and were served on 27.04.2016. Though it is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that no notice u/s.8[1] of PMLA was served on the petitioner, the Dispatch Register maintained by the 1st respondent coupled with the Detailed Track Events filed in the typed set of documents would disclose that the petitioner was served with the Show Cause Notices u/s.8[1] ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me:- 13. Issue of summons and notices:- [1] Every summon or notice shall be issued in Form 3 or Form 4 or Form 5 or Form 6, as the case may be, signed by the Registrar or Administrative Officer. [2] Every summon and notice shall be served in the same manner as provided in Order V of Schedule I of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 [5 of 1908] and the provisions of that Order shall apply, mutatis, mutandis, to the proceedings before the Adjudicating Authority: Provided that there shall be no requirement of an application as provided under sub-rule [1] of rule 9-A of the Order V of Schedule I of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 [5 of 1908] for the purpose of service of summon or notice, as the case may be, Provided further that there shall be no requirement of an order of the Adjudicating Authority as provided under rule 20 of the Order V of Schedule I of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 [5 of 1908] for effecting substituted service. [3] Notwithstanding anything in sub-regulation [2], a summon or notice may be communicated through electronic mode as provided in section 13 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 [21 of 2000] and transmission of such communication ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reported in AIR 1973 Delhi 129, filing of proceeding without the next friend is only an irregularity and as per the decision of this Court in [Thinamappa Vs. Hanusva] reported in AIR 1959 Madras 157 , it can be waived by the conduct of the defendant and since it is only an irregularity, normally time is granted to enable the minor/plaintiff to be represented by the next friend. 20 It is useful to refer to Appendix A Pleadings, as title of suits and it says that in description of properties in particular cases, in case of minor A.B., a minor (add description and residence), by C.D. [or by the Court of Wards], his next friend . 21 A careful perusal and scrutiny of PMLA, Rules and Regulations, framed thereunder, do not prohibit the application of the Code of Civil Procedure to the proceedings except certain exceptions. As per the own admission of the 1st respondent complainant, the defendants 2 to 5 in the Original Complaint No.552/2016, are minors and the Cause Title insofar as they are concerned, is not in proper form. 22 This Court, vide order dated 23.06.2016, has asked the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents for production of acknowledgments and accor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
