Tribunal Denies Appellant's Possession Request and Stay Application

The Tribunal dismissed the appellant's applications to revisit the order dated 17.10.2019 and to grant possession of the ground floor of the attached property. The Tribunal found inconsistencies in the appellant's arguments and rejected the plea for possession, noting the rental arrangement of the property. Additionally, the application for a stay on the letter dated 14.01.2020 was dismissed, with the Tribunal emphasizing that the corrigendum did not significantly impact the appellant's rights. Further proceedings were scheduled for a specified date.

---

---

Issues:
1. Revisiting the order dated 17.10.2019 passed by the Tribunal.
2. Directing the delivery of possession of the ground floor of the attached property.
3. Stay of the letter dated 14.01.2020.

Analysis:
1. The appellant filed an application to revisit the order dated 17.10.2019, citing that the Adjudicating Authority passed an order on 09.10.2019 after becoming functus officio, which was illegal. The appellant argued that the power of review is not available under the PMLA, 2002, and the order dated 09.10.2019 altered material conditions. The appellant also claimed that blocking access to the kitchen on the ground floor would compromise the usability of the property. The Tribunal noted that the legal plea regarding the order dated 09.10.2019 is already under challenge in another appeal, and any decision on this issue could impact the pending appeal. The Tribunal dismissed the application, stating there were no grounds to revisit the order.

2. The appellant also sought the delivery of possession of the ground floor of the attached property. The respondent argued that the appellant had rented out a portion of the property until 15.01.2020, contradicting the claim of needing possession due to family members moving to Delhi to escape severe winter conditions in Kashmir. The Tribunal found inconsistencies in the appellant's claims and rejected the plea for possession of the ground floor.

3. Another application was filed for a stay on the letter dated 14.01.2020. The respondent contended that the corrigendum issued on 09.10.2019 was to correct an error due to an amendment in the PMLA, not a review order. The respondent also highlighted discrepancies in the appellant's submissions regarding the property being a compact unit and the rental arrangement. The Tribunal dismissed the application for a stay, emphasizing that the corrigendum did not substantially affect the appellant's rights.

In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed both applications, stating there were no grounds to revisit the order dated 17.10.2019 or grant possession of the ground floor. The Tribunal found inconsistencies in the appellant's claims and rejected the application for a stay on the letter dated 14.01.2020. The matter was scheduled for further hearing on a specified date.

---