9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (2) TMI 866X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion has also been taken in that appeal. If the order dated 09.10.2019 is considered and any decision is taken in the present application on the same legal issue than it would have the effect on the merit of the said appeal. Therefore, the contention raised in the appeal cannot be considered without hearing the aforesaid appeal on merit. The order of handing over the possession of rented floor was passed on 17.10.2019. The applicant accepted the order. When the date of handing over the possession came she tried to retain the possession on different grounds - there are no prima facie grounds to re-visit the order - application dismissed. - MP-PMLA-6817/DLI/2020 (Revisiting Order), MP-PMLA-6871/DLI/2020 (Stay), MP-PMLA-6388/DLI/2019 (Stay ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vesting the power to review, the final order, on the Adjudicating Authority. The order dated 09.10.2019 is legally untenable being non-est in law. (iv) The property in question is a compact single dwelling unit (duplex type) identified as L-25/4, DLF, Phase-II, Gurgaon there is only one kitchen in the said compact premises which is situated on the ground floor and the adjudication of the part of the order dated 17.10.2019 would result in blocking access to the kitchen in the said premises and the same would severely compromise the usability of the premises by the applicant and his family. (v) Due to severe winter condition prevailing in Srinagar the younger son and the entire family of the appellant including his younger son Dr. Yas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sional attachment order was passed prior to the coming into force of amendment to Section 8(3)(a) of the said Act. So, the contention of the applicant/appellant that the period of ninety days shall apply in terms of Section 8(3)(a) is misconceived. (iii) The contentions raised in the applications are subject matter of another appeal which has been filed by the appellant against the order dated 09.10.2019. (iv) The corrigendum did not result in change of facts which would substantially affect the right of the applicant. The corrigendum was for correcting a bonafide error which was on account of amendment in the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. (v) The corrigendum issued not a review order. It was to correct a bonafide or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tention raised in the appeal cannot be considered without hearing the aforesaid appeal no. FPA-PMLA- 3385/DLI/2019 on merit. 7. So far as the factual aspects is concerned, the applicant has taken a new stand that apartment is a compact dwelling unit (duplex type). If the copy of the appeal as well as the stay application filed earlier are perused nowhere this plea was taken. Earlier also it was pleaded by the applicant that her son Dr. Yawar Zahoor Watali with his family is residing in the first floor of the building and the ground floor is rented out for ₹ 10,000/- p.m. Even the applicant had filed copy of the unregistered rent agreement which was expiring on 15.01.2020. If the apartment is a compact unit then the applicant would ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
