2014 (4) TMI 1280

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... order dated 19 March 2004 passed in Misc. Application Nos.409 of 2003 and 410 of 2003 in MPID Special Case 34 of 2004 arising out of MECR No.1 of 2003 investigated by Economic Offence Wing, Mumbai. The learned Trial Court by a common order dated 19 March 2004 was pleased to dismiss the said Criminal Applications No. 409 of 2003 and 410 of 2003 filed by the Appellants for unsealing and releasing of the premises bearing Nos.502 and 501 respectively situated on the fifth floor of the Sangli Bank Building, 296, Perin Nariman Street, Fort, Mumbai 400 001. 2. The Appellants have questioned the correctness of the said impugned order dated 19 March 2004 by the present Appeals. Though the Appellants have preferred two separate Appeals with respe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....gating agency did not exactly disclose or indicate any material to show that the Appellants were in actual physical possession of the said premises. 5. The Appellants thereafter preferred Miscellaneous Application Nos.409 of 2003 and 410 of 2003 respectively for releasing /unsealing of the aforesaid premises. As stated herein above, the learned Trial Judge has rejected the said Applications by a common order dated 19 March 2004 which is impugned herein. The learned Trial Court while rejecting the said applications by its order dated 19 March 2004 apart from the fact of reiterating the observations made in his earlier order dated 14 July 2003 in Miscellaneous Application Nos. 248 and 247 of 2003, has further held that the investigation wa....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed with the present Respondent No.2. This Court had therefore granted leave to the Appellants to join Respondent No.2. After receipt of the notice, Respondent No.2 appeared in the present Appeals and filed an affidavit dated 21 March 2014 which is at page 92 on record. 8. Respondent No.2 by its said affidavit has claimed possession of the premises to be handed over to it in the event this Court is of the opinion that the premises are to be released from the custody of the police authorities. The Appellants thereafter have filed a rejoinder dated 1 April 2014 and reiterated the fact that the Appellants were the lawful tenants of the then Sangli Bank Limited and now are the tenants of Respondent No.2 i.e. ICICI Bank Limited. The Appellants....