Gautam Kundu vs Joint Director, Directorate Of Enforcement, Kolkata

G. C. Mishra, Acting Chairman

The matter is taken up through video conferencing. The appearances of the learned counsels are as above.

FPA-PMLA-3886/KOL/2021

MP-PMLA-8148/KOL/2021 (Stay) & MP-PMLA-8149/KOL/2021 (COD) in FPA-PMLA-3886/KOL/2021

The present appeal has been filed by the appellant on 01.02.2021 seeking setting aside and quashing of the impugned order dated 12.01.2018.

Alongwith the appeal the appellant has filed an application for stay of the operation of the impugned order and operation of the notice for eviction from

premises dated 25.01.2021. The appellant has also filed an application for Condonation of Delay of 1114 days.

The appeal is taken up at 11.00 a.m. today. During the course of hearing, the learned counsel for the Respondent submitted that I had recused from

hearing in the appeals filed by the Rose Valley Group of Companies and the present appellant who is the CMD of Rose Valley Group of Companies.

In view of the same the present Bench may not hear the present appeal.

On the other hand the learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appeal is preferred against an order passed in a different O.C. and the

properties are also different, so the Bench can very well hear and pass appropriate order.

As there was no data immediately available with this Bench regarding filing of appeals by Rose Valley Group of Companies and recusal of the

undersigned from hearing their appeals so the appeal was fixed at 3.00 p.m.

The appeal was taken up again at 3.00 p.m. The learned counsels for both the parties are present. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that

as there is no other Bench in this Appellate Tribunal and as the last date of eviction is expiring today and the family of the appellant particularly the

ailing mother would be in trouble, therefore, the order of ‘status quo’ may be granted.

On the other hand, the learned counsel for the Respondent raised strong objections and submitted that since the Hon’ble Member has recused

from the appeals filed by Rose Valley Group of Companies and since, the Hon’ble Member has passed order in one of the O.C. arising out of

same ECIR involving the present appellant, so it may not be appropriate for this Bench to deal with this appeal. It is further submitted by him that the

appellant has not disclosed the fact that the properties involved in the present appeal are subject matter of consideration of Advisory Committee for

Disposal of the Properties, appointed by Hon’ble High Court, Kolkata.

Heard both sides. On verification of records/appeals filed by Rose Valley Group of Companies, it is seen that I was not part of the Bench headed by

the then Chairman, Justice Manmohan Singh with Co-Member Shri B.K. Bansal. It is to mention here that the O.C. No. 508/2015, in which the

present appellant was a party, was dealt with by me as an Adjudicating Authority. And the said O.C. was ordered against the present appellant,

therefore, it would not be appropriate for me to hear the present appeal filed by Shri Gautam Kundu.

In view of the above, I am recusing from the appeal, therefore, the Registry is directed to place this appeal before some other Bench as and when

constituted after appointment of Chairman/Members.

List the matter on 10th May, 2021.