Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the appellants were entitled to condonation of the inordinate delay in filing the appeals against the adjudicating authority's order, and whether the delay could be excused on the ground that earlier writ proceedings amounted to prosecution before the wrong forum so as to attract the benefit of limitation principles.
Analysis: The appeals against the adjudicating authority's order were required to be filed within the statutory period prescribed under Section 26(3) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, with condonation possible only on sufficient cause being shown. The Court held that the adjudicating authority's order had not been specifically challenged in the writ petitions, that the writ petitions had proceeded on an incorrect statement that appeals had already been filed, and that there was no credible basis to invoke Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963. The Court further held that the appellants had been negligent in not pursuing the correct remedy in time, and that the delay was not explained by bona fide conduct.
Conclusion: The delay was not liable to be condoned, and the appellants were not entitled to the benefit of Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963.