ROHIN MODI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petition filed on 2nd March 2020 is circulated today for urgent orders pointing out that auction of paintings is scheduled by Respondent Nos.1 and 2 tomorrow i.e. 5th March, 2020.

(2.) Contentions are, the owner of the paintings - Respondent No.4 - Trust did not receive any notice either of attachment or of its confirmation or any notice of auction. It is claimed that Petitioner, who is one of the beneficiaries of the Trust, has also not received any such notice. It is pointed out that Provisional Attachment Order: 05/2019 dated 25 th February, 2019 does not mention said paintings as attached items.

(3.) Without prejudice, it is submitted that as per Section 8 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (for short the Act of 2002), the attached property could not have been sold and, therefore, a story that those paintings are subject to speedy and natural decay so as to enable Respondents to take recourse to Rule 4(2) of the Prevention of Money Laundering (Taking Possession of Attached or Frozen Properties confirmed by the Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2013 (for short the Rules of 2013) has been invoked. It is submitted that paintings are stored in climate controlled condition as of now and as such there is no question of the same being decayed. On the contrary, they constitute a property which gains appreciation.