TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (7) TMI 1256
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and others and abusing his official position sanctioned housing loans/additional housing loans without adhering to the basic Banking norms of pre-sanction requirements to various persons; that all these persons were related/known to the said Shri S. Kumar; that the above said borrowers did not have any regular source of income; that the loans were sanctioned on the basis of forged/fabricated documents; that the loans were released in favour of M/s. K.V. Constructions which was owned by the said Shri S. Kumar @ Vijayakumar; that the said borrowers misutilised the loan proceeds by diverting the same for some other purpose; that the said Shri S. Kumar @ Vijayakumar was the mastermind of the criminal conspiracy and that as a result of the said criminal conspiracy, the Bank had incurred a huge pecuniary loss running into crores of rupees. Hence, CBI, ACB, Chennai had registered a Criminal Case against Shri Muralidharan, S. Kumar @ Vijayakumar and others vide FIR No. RC/MA/2011/A0046. Based on the said FIR, investigations were carried out by CBI and as a result, 8 Chargesheets were filed in the Court of the Hon'ble Special Judge for CBI cases, Chennai invoking Sections 120B read with Sec....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ating Officer of CBI, that they have occupied the houses either on rental basis or on lease; that the lease agreements were made in the name of Shri N. Devaraj, paternal uncle of Shri S. Kumar @ Vijayakumar or with Shri Kumar @ Vijayakumar; that there were no rental agreement with those who were staying on rent; that the lease money and rental money including advance, were paid by them only to Shri S. Kumar @ Vijayakumar. 2.5 It is alleged that a sum total of Rs. 7.45 crores was estimated as a loss to the Syndicate Bank and the beneficiary of this money is alleged to be Shri S. Kumar @ Vijayakumar and his associates and that the entire proceeds of the fraudulent transactions as mentioned in the said chargesheets are enjoyed by the said Shri S. Kumar @ Vijayakumar, his associates and properties on which various loans from Syndicate Bank were sanctioned are still being dealt with by the said Shri S. Kumar @ Vijayakumar for his own benefits. 2.6 It is alleged that Shri S. Kumar @ Vijayakumar is the mastermind behind the entire fraud. Shri V.J. Vijayakumar, his Manager, had specifically stated that the bank accounts, numbering more than ten, which were opened in his (V.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the case of Bhagirathi Green Fields Pvt. Ltd. 4. The appeal and application were taken up for consideration after the consent of parties. The learned counsel for the appellant contended that joint appeal by 20 appellants would be maintainable because the respondent/Enforcement Director has registered one single ECIR vide No. 9/2013, dated 8-8-2013, passed one provisional attachment No. 13/2014, dated 5-9-2014 provisionally attaching various properties in the name of different persons, one original complaint OC No. 359/2014 against 23 defendants was filed before the Adjudicating Authority and Adjudicating Authority has also passed one common impugned order dated 7-1-2015 confirming the attachment of the properties provisionally attached. The counsel contended that though the respondent has alleged and connected all the transactions in the scheduled offence and purchase of property to the first appellant, however, all the appellants are claiming that the properties are their independently acquired properties from legitimate sources and they are not proceeds of crime liable for attachment. It was argued that as all the appellants were defendants in adjudication proceedings ar....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ties and considered the appeal and all the relevant documents filed by parties. Section 26 of PMLA which provides the right to appeal to any aggrieved person reads as follows : "26. Appeals to Appellate Tribunal. - (1) Save as otherwise provided in sub-section (3), the director or any person aggrieved by an order made by the Adjudicating Authority under this Act, may prefer an appeal to the Appellate Tribunal. (2) Any reporting entity aggrieved by any order of the Director made under sub-section (2) of section 13, may prefer an appeal to the Appellate Tribunal. (3) Every appeal preferred under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) shall be filed within a period of forty-five days from the date on which a copy of the order made by the Adjudicating Authority or Director is received and it shall be in such form and be accompanied by such fee as may be prescribed: Provided that the Appellate Tribunal may after giving an opportunity of being heard entertain an appeal after the expiry of the said period of forty-five days if it is satisfied that there was sufficient cause for not filing it within that period. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... shall be numbered consecutively; and shall specify the address of service at which notice or other processes of the Appellate Tribunal may be served on the appellant and the date on which the order appealed against was served on the appellant. (4) Where the appeal is preferred after the expiry of the period of forty-five days referred to in sub-section (3) of section 26 of the Act, it shall be accompanied by a petition, in quadruplicate, duly verified and supported by the documents, if any, relied upon by the appellant, showing cause as to how the appellant had been prevented from preferring the appeal within the period of forty-five days. (5) Any notice required to be served on the appellant shall be served on him in the manner prescribed in rule 5 of these rules at the address of service specified in the appeal." 10. Appellant is defined under Rule 2(d) of Appeal Rules as follows:- "2(d) "appellant" means an aggrieved person who prefers an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal;" 11. Following is the Form prescribed for filing appeal as per Appeal Rules :- "FORM [See sub-rule (1) of rule 3] From________....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....de by the Adjudicating Authority is received and in case appeal if filed after the expiry of forty-five days, it shall be accompanied by a petition showing cause as to how the appellant had been prevented from preferring the appeal within the period of forty-five days. On such petition, the Tribunal can entertain an appeal if it is satisfied that there was sufficient cause for not filing it within the period. Thus, the Tribunal can refuse to entertain an appeal if it does not find that there was sufficient cause for not filing the appeal within the statutory period of forty-five days. When two or more appellants who have been served the order of the Adjudicating Authority separately on different dates, the period of limitation will be computed separately for each of the appellants and consequently, limitation for filing appeal for each of the appellants will expire on different dates. In such a case, if a joint appeal is filed, it may be beyond period of limitation in case of one/some or all the appellants and after hearing arguments on petition for condonation of delay, the Tribunal may or may not be satisfied in the case of one/some or all the appellants as the case may be and de....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s/her property attached and not for property attached of other appellant(s). In other words as each appellant is independently aggrieved, therefore the aggrieved appellants has to file separate appeals with appropriate copies. 17. A perusal of appeal reveals that though appeal has been filed jointly by 20 appellants but only one appeal fee has been filed and it is not the plea of the appellants that though joint appeal has been filed by twenty appellants but twenty appeal fees has been paid for twenty appellants and for the purpose of pursuing appeal on behalf of twenty appellants, joint appeal may be allowed to be pursued. It is also not the plea of the appellants that all the subject properties whose attachment is contested are jointly owned by all the twenty appellants and they should be treated jointly as one appellant. 18. In the case of Bhagirathi Green Fields Pvt. Ltd. & Others (supra), Adjudicating Authority passed a single order dated 14-1-2010 under Section 8 of PMLA confirming attachment of several properties which properties were provisionally attached by a single order of provisional attachment under Section 5 of PMLA on the basis of single Original Com....