9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (5) TMI 816X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Justice Manmohan Singh Chairman For the Appellant : Ms. Ansuya Salwan, Advocate, Shri Vaibhav Dang, Advocate For the Respondent : Mohd. Faraz, Advocate JUDGEMENT FPA-PMLA-2568/LKW/2018 1. The appellant has filed the present appeal against the order dated 13.08.2018 whereby the Adjudicating Authority has confirmed the PAO dated 28.03.2018 for attachment of Appellant‟s residential property No.144, Golf Links, New Delhi 110003, ad-measuring 350 sq. mts. 2. The brief facts are that the work of Expansion of apron, Construction of additional Taxiway, Extension of Runway and allied works at Varanasi Airport‟ was awarded to M/s. Brite-Aricon (Consortium) [a joint venture of two companies, namely M/s. B.R. Arora Associates Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Aricon Developers Pvt. Ltd.]. 3. It is alleged on behalf of the appellant that the work was executed to satisfaction of Airport Authority of India (for short AAI) and completed on 20.08.2010. Copy of Performance Certificate dt 11.12.2010 for satisfactory completion was issued by AAI. The same is placed on record. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (Consortium). Relevant portion from the arbitral award are extracted hereunder for ready reference: - Further, as per the observations of Manager Engg. AAI recorded on 22.03.2011 of pg 5 of the EOT case (Ex C-174), AAI suffered no loss as the Apron was put in operation much later on 15.11.2010 and Runway Painting Drawing was not yet permitted even after 2 years of its construction (at Page no. 565 of the appeal paperbook) Finding of the Arbitrator 4.5 ....... as per the completion certificate recorded by the respondent, the work was completed as per specifications and satisfactorily and there were no noticeable defects except a few given in the annexure. Subsequent Performance Certificate issued on 11th Dec 2010 reinforces the position of satisfactory execution of work. Further, there is no denial that as per observations and recommendations of the DRB (Headed by Executive Director of AAI itself) given vide Report dated 7th Nov. 2012, the defects were apparently of minor nature since the Apron was in use for quite long, and as such the respondent was advised to take steps to remedy the situation and close accounts for the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n lieu of the residential house property, which is worth crores of rupees and is being used as appellant‟s residence since the year 1996. 18. It is alleged on behalf of the appellant that after hearing arguments from both sides the Adjudicating Authority reserved its orders on the complaint however, when the final order came to be passed without going into the merits of the case, particularly to the effect that the accused have already secured an amount of ₹ 1.24 Crores with the CBI Court. 19. It is matter on record that before the Adjudicating Authority, the appellant had submitted that the property has been attached against the alleged POC of ₹ 93,63,712/- as the said amount was not available in the bank account of M/s. Brite-Aricon (Consortium) and since no property is found in the name of M/s. Brite-Aricon (Consortium) therefore the property of appellant is attached in lieu of equivalent value of POC of ₹ 93,63,712/-. 20. The said findings are wholly without application of mind. No material is placed on record on behalf of respondent if any investigation in this is done. How can the property worth Rupees Fif ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ched equivalent to value thereof. This tribunal does not agree with the argument of the learned counsel for the respondent. 26. The respondent is not entitled to attach the immovable property more than the value of proceed of crime. It is the duty of the respondent to trace the proceed of crime by investigation. If the agency is failed to trace out the proceed of crime then on the basis of investigation report, the person concerned must be given an opportunity to secure the proceed of crime. Against ₹ 93,63,712/- as alleged proceed of crime, the property worth more than Rs. Fifty crores could not have been attached for equivalent value thereof otherwise it amounts abuse of process of law and the case of harassment and mental torture to the person concerned. 27. The main purpose under this Act is to secure the proceed of crime till the final order is passed by the Special Court. In the present case, there is no material on record to show that IO has not made any efforts in this regard. One is failed to understand why the IO was not able to trace out the proceed of crime from other six alleged accused. 28. It is evident that the Adj ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
