Vinod Kumar Chawla v. Union Of India & ORS

$~63 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 512/2011 & CM APPL. 1066/2011, CM APPLs. 1418687/2013, CM APPL. 23433/2015 VINOD KUMAR CHAWLA .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Naveen Malhotra, Mr. Rithik Malhotra, Advocates versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS .....Respondents Through:

Mr. Vikram Jetly, CGSC with Ms.

Shreya Jetly, Advocate

CORAM:

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE SUDHIR KUMAR JAIN

O R D E R

% 12.08.2024 1.

The present petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution for quashing the forfeiture notice under section 6(1) SAFEMA dated 30.11.1999 issued by the respondent no. 2 i.e. competent authority and also to quash the subsequent proceedings including the forfeiture order 20.08.2009 issued by the respondent and the Appellate order dated 10.11.2010 passed by the Appellate Tribunal.

2.

The Appellate Tribunal for forfeited property New Delhi vide order dated 10.11.2010 has upheld the forfeiture of the property as mentioned in para no.11 of the order dated 10.11.2010. However, the competent authority before passing the order by the appellate authority allowed the petitioner, the option of payment of fine of Rs. 45,720/- in lieu of the forfeiture of this property in respect of property bearing no. E-526, Greater Kailash Part-II, New Delhi.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 17/08/2024 at 14:28:20

3.

The counsel for the petitioner stated that the petitioner had deposited the said amount and thereafter the property bearing no. E-526, Greater Kailash Part-II, New Delhi was order to be released. 4.

However, the competent authority also allowed an option for the payment of fine of Rs.4,20,000/- in lieu of the forfeiture property of M/s Wings Electronics situated at A-61, Sector -16, U.P. and the said payment was not paid by the petitioner.

5.

Mr. Vikram Jetly, Central Government Standing Counsel for the respondent stated that the petitioner beside Rs.4,20,000/- as fine is also required to deposit Rs.2,39,584/- towards the total stocks which was stated to be belonged to the petitioner and which was found to be kept in the premises of M/s Wings Electronics.

6.

Mr. Naveen Malhotra, Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner on instruction stated that the petitioner is ready to deposit Rs. 6,59,584/- either by way of pay order or demand draft in the name of the respondent no.2 on or before 30.11.2024. Let the needful be done accordingly. 7.

In view of the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioner, the present petition is accordingly disposed of with the pending application, However, in case, if the petitioner fails to deposit the amount on or before 30.11.2024 in that eventuality, the respondents shall be at liberty to initiate appropriate legal proceedings.

8.

It is made clear that after the payment of Rs. 6,59,584/-, the lien, if any, on above mentioned property shall stand discharged. DR. SUDHIR KUMAR JAIN, J AUGUST 12, 2024 j/abk The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 17/08/2024 at 14:28:20