2022 (6) TMI 1360

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ing that this Court would have no jurisdiction to entertain the present writ petitions. Insofar as W.P.(C) 6354/2022 is concerned, it is pointed out that the parties are all residents of Bangalore and that the principal order of attachment was also passed by an authority situate in that State. It is further pointed out that the properties which form subject matter of the said writ petitions are all situate in the State of Karnataka. Placing reliance on the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in Aasma Mohammed Farooq and Anr. Vs. Union of India and Ors. [2018 SCC OnLine Del 12800], Mr. Hossain would submit that the said writ petition would not be maintainable. Similar arguments are addressed in respect of W.P.(C) 7656/2022. Mr. Hoss....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hat the Court went further and expounded the doctrine of forum conveniens with reference to a situation where original authority is in one State and the seat of the appellate authority is located in another State. Once it is categorically held in paras 25 to 27 that in such a case, the writ would be maintainable in both the Courts and also that it is the petitioner which has right to choose his forum, we are of the view that primacy to the freedom given to the petitioner needs to be respected. Therefore, we clarify that normally in such circumstances, writ would be maintainable at both the places and only in extreme cases where the Court finds that it is totally inconvenient for a Court to entertain the writ petition and the other High Cour....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....u Security Services was noticed in Aasma Mohammed Farooq with the Division Bench agreeing with the view expressed therein and observing that only in a situation where a Court finds that it would be "totally inconvenient" to entertain the writ petition that the doctrine of forum conveniens would be liable to be invoked. 4. The Court notes that in W.P.(C) 6354/2022 an appeal has already been filed. The Tribunal is yet to be constituted and it is in the aforesaid backdrop that the petitioner has instituted the present writ petition. Insofar as W.P.(C) 7656/2022 is concerned the challenge is to the authority of the Adjudicating Authority to proceed further in terms of Section 8 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 [PMLA] as more t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ections raised are negatived. Issue notice. Since the respondents are duly represented by learned counsel, let counter affidavits be filed on or before the next date fixed. 9. List on 04.11.2022. CM APPL. 19204/2022 (for Stay) in W.P.(C) 6354/2022 1. The Court notes the submission of learned counsel who contends that it had validly extended financial facilities to M/s SreeKanvaSouhardha Cooperative Credit limited [SKSCCL] against proper documentation and on creation of equitable mortgages. It is submitted that those mortgages preceded the attachment of properties by the Enforcement Director under the provisions of the Act. Matter requires consideration. 2. Parties shall consequently maintain status quo till the next date of list....