9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (12) TMI 774X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... umstances of the case would reveal that the very property has been divested by the creating false documents, which has not been disputed. The property has been attached in the proceedings initiated against the second and third respondents. According to the petitioner, they are in possession of the property under some oral arrangement from the very inception and there was also an oral agreement for sale between the original owner and themselves. The factum of their possession is not disputed - this Court is of the view that as the possession of the petitioner has not been disputed by the Department, any Order evicting or taking away their possession, will certainly affect the right of a person and such person would be an aggrieved person and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ORDER The Writ Petition in 6329 of 2013 has been filed to quash the possession Notice dated 26.11.2012 issued by the first respondent and also to direct the first respondent not to proceed against the property at New No.16, Old No.3, Porur Somasundaram Street, North Usman Road, T.Nagar, Chennai 600 017 pursuant to the confirmation of Order of attachment in O.C.No.142 of 2012 dated 04.09.2012. 2. The Writ Petition in 13609 of 2014 has been filed to quash the Form III Possession Notice dated 06.05.2014 issued by the second respondent. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that one Lakshmibai Ammal is the original owner of the property situated at Plot No.15, Old No.7, New No.16, Porur Somasundara Mudaliar Street, Zamin Mambalam, T.N ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation has been paid and before the sale has been registered, the said Lakshmibai Ammal died in the year 1986. Thereafter, some documents have been created by the second respondent as if she is the legal heir of the said Lakshmibai Ammal and dealt with the property and sold the property to the third respondent. Now proceedings have been initiated against the second respondent on the ground that the said proceeds is out of the crime and in the same process, interim attachment of the property has been passed under Section 5 The Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002 and thereafter, final attachment has been made under Section 8 of the The Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002 and a notice has also been issued. It is the contention of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rsonation. In fact, she claimed to be the daughter of the original owner Lakshmibai Ammal and dealt with the property. These facts have not been disputed. On the basis of the above forgery and impersonation, the property has been purchased by the third respondent, against whom proceedings have been initiated under the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002 and for the offences under sections Prevention of Corruption Act. These aspects have also not been disputed. Based on the above said documents, proceedings has been initiated. Accordingly, provisional attachment has been made under Section 5 of the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002 which has been confirmed under Section 8 of the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002 and the im ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... such attachment or retention of the seized property or record shall- (a) continue during the pendency of the proceedings relating to any scheduled offence before a court; and (b) become final after the guilt of the person is proved in the trial court and order of such trial court becomes final. (4) Where the provisional order of attachment made under sub-section (1) of section 5 has been confirmed under sub-section (3), the Director or any other officer authorised by him in this behalf shall forthwith take the possession of the attached property. 8. The above Section makes it very clear that if other than the owner, anybody claim as a tenant, notice is required only when the lease is registered under Section 17 of the Registrat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he petitioners cannot be evicted and the notice served on them shall be put on hold till the disposal of the appeal. In such view of the matter, the respondent is directed to serve a copy of the Order of attachment passed under section 8 of the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002 enabling the petitioner to file an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal as per Section 26 of The Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002. Such an appeal shall be filed within 45 days from the date of receipt of a copy of the attachment Order passed under Section 8 of the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002. The Appellate Tribunal may considering the facts and circumstances, decide the appeal. As the petitioners pursuing their remedy bonafidely in this Wr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
