JUNAID Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are aggrieved of and have assailed the order dated 1509-2022 passed by the Adjudicating Authority, New Delhi under the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act 2002, [hereafter 'the Act of 2002' for short], in terms whereof the provisional attachment order dtd. 25/3/2022 passed by Respondent No.3 under Sec. 5(1) of the Act of 2002 has been confirmed. Factual Matrix:

(2.) The respondent No.4 is registered as a 'Company Limited by shares' and is engaged in the business of Real Estate. In the year 2014, the respondent-Company issued a public notice in the electronic and print media that it was proposing to construct premium residential apartments at Humhama, Airport Road Srinagar, under the name and style 'Palm Springs'. It was represented that the project proposed by the respondent-Company was first of its kind in the valley, and would have all the ultra modern facilities. The petitioners, as is claimed by them. after exercising due diligence with regard to viability of the project and having regard to the fact that the housing project proposed by the respondent-Company was being developed by M/S ABL Tech infrastructure (JV), chose the construction link plan offered by the respondent No. 4 and, accordingly, applied for allotment of residential dwelling Units. As is claimed, the petitioners made it sure that the project had the approval of all the competent authorities including NOC from the Revenue Department and building permission by the Municipal Corporation.

(3.) The petitioners submit that they also deposited the booking amount and were accordingly issued allotment letters by respondent No. 4. The petitioners continued to make payments as per the mode and manner provided in the construction plan. The tri-party agreements were also executed between the petitioners and respondents Nos. 4, 5 and 6. While the petitioners were waiting for the project to be completed so that they could enter their residential units, the Responded No.4, abruptly stopped the construction in the year 2018. The respondent No.4 had been putting forth one excuse or the other for not completing the construction and in the meanwhile the petitioners came to know that respondent company was being investigated for serious frauds investigated under Sec. 212 of the Companies Act. The investigation led to filing of a complaint under Sec. 439(2) read with Ss. 436(a)(d)(2) and 421(1) of the Companies Act and Sec. 50 of the Limited Liability Partnership Act read with Sec. 193 of the Code of Criminal Procedure before the Court of Learned District and Session Judge-cum-Special Judge (Companies Act), Gurgaon, Haryana. The respondent Company got involved in the criminal litigation and as a result, the construction of the project remained as it was. The home buyers, including some of the petitioners herein, approached this Court by way of WPC 1185/2020 seeking inter alia direction to the official respondents therein to take appropriate steps to ensure that the project undertaken by respondent No.4 was completed in a time bound manner and the possession of the dwelling units/Flats handed over to the buyers, including the petitioners. There was also a prayer made in the alternative that the official respondents may take over the project and complete the same expeditiously.