Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Directorate Of Enforcement vs Anil Goel & Ors on 15 November, 2019
Author: Debangsu Basak
Bench: Debangsu Basak
1
463.
15.11.2019
S.D.
W.P. No. 21641 (W) of 2018
Directorate of Enforcement
versus
Anil Goel & Ors.
Mr. Bhaskar Prasad Banerjee
Ms. Debjani Ray
Mr. P. Baidya
....For the petitioner.
Mr. A. Bansal
....for the Respondent No. 1.
Mr. M.S. Tiwari Mr. S. Mishra ...For the Respondent No. 2.
Enforcement Directorate assails a decision of the National Company Law Tribunal holding that, the provisions of Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 does not have primacy over the provisions of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Act, 2016.
Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the issues raised in the present writ petition were considered in another matter by the High Court of Delhi and that, the issues were answered in favour of the petitioner.
2Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the private respondent submits that, a Special Leave Petition was preferred against such decision of the Delhi High Court and that, the Hon'ble Supreme Court was pleased to pass an order of status quo.
Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the National Company Law Tribunal seeks time to file affidavits.
In the facts of the present case, it would be appropriate to permit the parties to file affidavits.
Let affidavit‐in‐opposition be filed within four weeks from date. Reply thereto, if any, be filed within two weeks thereafter.
The writ petition will be treated as ready for hearing immediately on completion of the time stipulated for filing affidavits.
Liberty is given to the parties to mention the matter for early hearing.
Urgent certified website copy of this order, if applied for, be made available to the parties upon compliance of the formalities.
(Debangsu Basak, J.)