Appeals filed against order, property secured, usage permitted, Special Court to decide

The appeals were filed against a common order by the Appellate Tribunal for various acts. The Appellate Tribunal set aside the impugned order and provisional attachment, directing the appellant to deposit a specific sum to secure the property's value. The Court instructed the respondents not to alienate the attached property, allowing its use subject to their maintenance at their own cost. The respondents were required to deposit a specific amount for property usage pending a related case's decision. All issues were left for the Special Court to decide, with a directive to dispose of the related case within six months.

---

---

Issues:
Appeals against common order passed by the Appellate Tribunal for various acts - PMLA, SAFEMA, FEMA, NDPS, PBPT. Valuation of property for attachment. Error in Tribunal's recording of consent. Maintainability of appeals. Direction on property usage and expenses.

Analysis:
The civil miscellaneous appeals were filed by both parties against a common order by the Appellate Tribunal for PMLA, SAFEMA, FEMA, NDPS, and PBPT acts. The appeals arose from an order confirming provisional attachment orders passed by the Adjudicating Authority in Original Complaint No. 635 of 2016. The Appellate Tribunal directed the appellant to deposit a specific sum to secure the property's value mentioned in the reason to believe. The Tribunal allowed the appeals, setting aside the impugned order and provisional attachment. The Additional Solicitor General argued that the Tribunal erred in not considering various factors and the property's higher valuation, while the respondents' counsel contended that the Tribunal made a factual error regarding consent. The Tribunal's recording of consent was disputed by both sides, leading to arguments about the appeals' maintainability and the respondents' status as bona fide purchasers.

The Court suggested that the respondents should not alienate or encumber the attached property and could use it as a pathway, subject to maintaining it at their own cost. Any temporary structures or expenses incurred for the property's usage would also be the respondents' responsibility. The respondents were directed to deposit a specific amount for property usage pending the decision in a related case before the Special Court in Chennai. The Court agreed upon arrangements regarding property usage, expenses, and deposit, all subject to the Special Court's decision in the related case.

The Court clarified that all issues were left open for the Special Court to decide, directing the Special Court to dispose of the related case within six months. The common order of the Appellate Tribunal was modified accordingly, prohibiting the respondents from alienating or encumbering the property and modifying the conditions imposed by the Tribunal. The appeals were disposed of with no costs involved.

---