2018 (3) TMI 419

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....A-PMLA-1545 & 1547- 1548/CHN/2016 1. The above mentioned three appeals have been filed by Shri A. Seeni, Smt. S. Vasuki and Smt. S. Sugumari, Appellants against the order dated 17.10.2016 passed by the Adjudicating Authority. It is submitted that the appellant herein preferred an appeal against the order dated 17.10.2016 passed by Adjudicating Authority under the PMLA 2002 in O.C No. 601 of 2016 in PAO No. 11/2016 dated 26.04.2016 [ECIR No. 04//MDSZO/PMLA/2014 dated 23.07.2017]. 2. The case against the appellant is that an FIR NO. 140/2013 was registered on 18.06.2013 in the Natham Police Station, Natham, Dindigul District, Tamil Nadu against Shri A. Seenivasan (D-1) @ Seeni, Smt. S. Sugumari (D-3), Smt. S. Vasuki (D-2), Shri Muthupan....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....in - law late Smt. Sulochana was given to his second wife Smt. Vasuki, as a gift through partition deed   Movable Properties - B Sl. No. Property Description Value Name of Owner Source of Income 1 Chevrolet Tavera B3 bearing Reg. No. TN -57-AB- 2423. Rs. 7,88,000/- Smt. S. Vasuki W/o Shri A. Seeni @ Seenivasan A. Seeni @ Seenivasan stated that an amount of Rs. 3,00,000/- was used from the maturity amounts of Rs. 1,51,347/- and Rs. 1,50,631/- LIC Money Back Policies taken by his wives Smt. Sugumari and Smt. Vasuki respectively fro purchase of the car and the balance amount of Rs. 4,95,000/- was paid out of loan sanctioned by Mahindra & Mahindra Finance Ltd. in the year 2010.   4. During the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... that all the Appellants are now acquitted in all the cases including FIR No. 140/2013, hence on this ground itself this Tribunal may allow the present appeals and release all the property of the appellants and drop all the proceedings under PMLA Act. Learned counsel for the appellant is that despite the same, the attachment order was confirmed by the Adjudicating Authority. It might be possible that since the PMLA complaint was pending therefore the Adjudicating Authority has exercised his discretion not to drop the proceedings but to continue with the attachment. 9. When the matter is taken up today, the learned counsel for the appellants has produced the copy of the order dated 20th December, 2017 passed in CC No. 05/2016 whereby the ....