G. RADHAKRISHNAN Vs. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN these writ petitions, the challenge is to the summons issued by the Directorate of Enforcement, Madurai, calling upon the petitioners to appear before the designated authority on 15.07.2014 at 11.00 a.m.

(2.) THE petitioner in W.P.(MD)No.11525 of 2014, is Mr.G.Radhakrishnan, who is described as a partner of a firm under the name and style of M/s.Chivas Trading Corporation, Trichy, who has been directed to appear in person today (15.07.2014) and produce the following documents:

(3.) MR .B.Saravanan, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the impugned summons is bad in law for several reasons. It is pointed out that Section 50 of the Prevention of Money -Laundering Act, 2002,(hereinafter referred as the Act) enumerates the power of the authority regarding the summon for production of the documents and to give evidence etc.