AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (4) TMI 950
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... first respondent and Mr.M.L.Ganesh, learned counsel appearing for the second respondent. 3. Mr.Vijaya Naryan learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Revision Petitioner would submit that the petitioner had been embroiled in various litigations including the proceedings under PMLA Act. He would submit that the appellant had independently borrowed monies from the second respondent and had also stood as a guarantor for the third respondent for a loan that had been serviced by the second respondent in favour of the third respondent. He would submit that as regards to the third respondent, the second respondent had instituted proceedings before the Debut Recovery Tribunal in the year 2017. As against the third respondent Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) proceedings were also initiated, wherein a Liquidator was appointed and the third respondent was sold as a going concern to one M/s.Agniti Industrial Parks Private Limited. The sale was also approved by the NCLT, Chennai. He would submit that during the entire proceedings as against the third respondent before the NCLT, the second respondent had not made any claim as against the third respondent much as claimed which it had made....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., as against the third respondent and petitioner as a borrower and guarantor, in both the insolvency proceedings, it would only be presumed that such claim as against the petitioner had stood waived by it. According, to him, when the insolvency proceedings were initiated against a corporate debtor, the creditor is bound to disclose all its claim as against the corporate debtor for adjudication by the insolvency Court which is the NCLT, in the present case. 7. He would submit that having failed to make such claim, the second respondent is estopped from making any claim which was available to it prior to initiation of such proceedings. He would submit that the second respondent had approached the Special Court by invoking the Provisions of Sub-Section 8 of Section 8 of the PMLA Act to order restoration and release of immovable properties described in the schedule and to permit it to sell the same in execution of the Debt Recovery Certificate issued in its favour. He would submit that on the facts stated above, the Recovery Certificate issued against the petitioner itself is a non-est certificate and the same cannot be executed. 8. That apart, he would submit that the claim of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....st respondent would submit that the second respondent Bank, who is the claimant had suffered a direct loss due to the conduct of the petitioner and dilution of its securities. He would further submit that as a rightful and legitimate claimant, the second respondent which had suffered direct and quantifiable loss is entitled for restoration of the property which had been mortgaged to it by the petitioner to safeguard its interest. He would further submit that at any rate, it is not disputed by the petitioner of its mortgage with the second respondent and it would only be petitioner who would be benefitted if the second respondent is allowed to proceed with the sale of the property from any future interest. Hence, he seeks dismissal of the Revision. 11. Mr.M.L.Ganesh, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the second respondent would submit that the second respondent has a decree upon which a recovery certificate had been issued and the property had also been attached by the Debt Recovery Tribunal. He would further submit that a claim before the Debt Recovery Tribunal was not the subject matter of the insolvency proceedings that has been initiated against the petitioner and th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... indicate the sources of his income, earning or assets, out of which or by means of which he has acquired the property attached under sub-section (1) of section 5, or, seized 2[or frozen] under section 17 or section 18, the evidence on which he relies and other relevant information and particulars, and to show cause why all or any of such properties should not be declared to be the properties involved in money-laundering and confiscated by the Central Government: Provided that where a notice under this sub-section specifies any property as being held by a person on behalf of any other person, a copy of such notice shall also be served upon such other person: Provided further that where such property is held jointly by more than one person, such notice shall be served to all persons holding such property. (2) The Adjudicating Authority shall, after-- (a) considering the reply, if any, to the notice issued under subsection (1); (b) hearing the aggrieved person and the Director or any other officer authorised by him in this behalf; and (c) taking into account all relevant materials placed on record before him, by an order, record a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uch property involved in the money laundering or which has been used for commission of the offence of money-laundering shall stand confiscated to the Central Government. (6) Where on conclusion of a trial under this Act, the Special Court finds that the offence of money laundering has not taken place or the property is not involved in money-laundering, it shall order release of such property to the person entitled to receive it. (7) Where the trial under this Act cannot be conducted by reason of the death of the accused or the accused being declared a proclaimed offender or for any other reason or having commenced but could not be concluded, the Special Court shall, on an application moved by the Director or a person claiming to be entitled to possession of a property in respect of which an order has been passed under sub-section (3) of section 8, pass appropriate orders regarding confiscation or release of the property, as the case may be, involved in the offence of money-laundering after having regard to the material before it. (8) Where a property stands confiscated to the Central Government under sub-section (5), the Special Court, in such manner as m....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (1) The Special Court, after framing of the charge under section 4 of the Act, on the basis of an application moved for restoration of a property attached under subsection (1) of section 5, or, seized or frozen under section 17 or section 18 of the Act prior to confiscation, if it thinks fit, may, for the purposes of the second proviso to sub-section (8) of section 8 of the Act, cause to be published a notice in two daily newspapers, one in English language and one in vernacular language, having sufficient circulation in the locality where such property is situated calling upon the claimants, who claim to have a legitimate interest in such property or part thereof, to submit and establish their claims, if any, for obtaining restoration of such property or part thereof. 17. The said Provision had come up for consideration before the Hon'ble Apex Court in the judgment relied upon by the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner in Crl.A.No.729 of 2026 dated 06.02.2026. After analysing the Provisions of the PMLA Act, the Hon'ble Apex Court has concluded as follows:- "5.2. On the basis of the interpretation given by us in this judgment, we conclude as follows: ....