2014 (1) TMI 692

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Counsel JUDGMENT 1. In a complaint (Annexure P-1) under Section 56 of The Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as FERA) read with Sub-section (3) & (4) of Section 49 of The Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999, petitioner-company and its four Directors have been summoned as accused by trial court vide order of 28th May, 2012 (Annexure P-2). 2. In this petition,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ntemplated under section 61 (ii) of the FERA, 1973 was given to the petitioners before filing of the complaint under section 56 of the FERA. (ii) That relied upon documents were not furnished to the petitioners before filing of the complaint under section 56 of the FERA; (iii) Role of each of the individual accused Directors is not specified in the complaint. 4. To resist this petition....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....for the purpose of proviso to Section 61 (2) of FERA. 5. It was maintained on behalf of respondents that in the complaint (Annexure P-1) in question, specific role has been attributed to petitioners and attention of this Court was drawn to paragraph No.2 (vii) & (viii) of the complaint (Annexure P-1). It was disputed on behalf of respondents that documents relied upon in the complaint were not ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... maintain in their counter affidavit that Opportunity Notices in terms of Section 67 of FERA were issued to petitioners and the documents relied upon in the complaint in question were supplied to petitioners. However, petitioners dispute it. This raises a triable issue which is required to be determined at trial. 8. The stand of petitioners that there was no intentional or wilful default on the....