Sale of Attached Properties Allowed; Appellant's Residence Temporarily Protected Pending Further Tribunal Stay.

The SC permitted the sale of attached properties, except for one claimed as the appellant's residence, which was temporarily stayed for equitable reasons. The appellant may seek a stay from the Tribunal against recovery. The Court did not opine on mortgagees' claims, directing them to the SC for resolution.

---

---

Issues involved: Stay on sale of properties under attachment pending appeal before Tribunal, claim of mortgagees from co-owners of properties.

Stay on sale of properties pending appeal before Tribunal:
The appellant, a "notified person" under Section 3(2) of the Special Court (Trial of Offences Relating to Transactions in Securities) Act, 1992, had properties under attachment due to arrears of income tax. The Special Court allowed the sale of certain properties without investigation under Section 9-A of the Act. The appellant sought a stay on the sale pending appeal before the Tribunal. The Court considered relevant judgments and ruled that the sale cannot be postponed as there is no stay on recovery and the demand is outstanding. However, the sale of one property, claimed to be the residential house of the appellant, was temporarily stayed for equitable reasons. The appellant was allowed to seek a stay from the Tribunal against recovery, which would impact the sale of properties.

Claim of mortgagees from co-owners:
Alleged mortgagees from the co-owners of the properties under attachment also claimed rights in the properties proposed for sale. The Court refused to express an opinion on their claim or their standing to move the application, directing them to approach the Special Court for their claims. The request for their impleadment in the Court was also denied.

This judgment addressed the issue of stay on the sale of properties under attachment pending appeal before the Tribunal and the claim of mortgagees from co-owners of the properties. The Court allowed the sale of certain properties while temporarily staying the sale of one property claimed to be the residential house of the appellant. The appellant was granted the liberty to seek a stay from the Tribunal against recovery, affecting the sale of properties. The Court refused to express an opinion on the mortgagees' claim, directing them to the Special Court for further action.

---