Piramal Capital And Hounsing ... vs Joint Director, Directorate Of ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 3946 Bom

2023:BHC-AS:12201-DB                                                     4-ASWPST-10286-2023.DOC




                     Ashwini


                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                       CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                                   WRIT PETITION (ST) NO. 10286 OF 2023

                     Piramal Capital and Housing Finance Ltd                             ...Petitioner
                            Versus
                     Joint Director, Directorate of Enforcement,                     ...Respondents
                     Bengaluru Zonal Office & Ors


                     Mr Venkatesh Dhond, Senior Advocate, with P Singhania, VS
                          Negi & Ekta Tyagi, i/b DSK Legal, for the Petitioner.


                                                   CORAM     G.S. Patel &
                                                             Neela Gokhale, JJ.

                                                   DATED:    20th April 2023
                     PC:-

1. On 20th March 2023 we passed a detailed order and judgment in Writ Petition No. 1360 of 2023 1 filed by SBICAP ASHWINI HULGOJI GAJAKOSH Ventures Ltd. This was also against the Enforcement Directorate Digitally signed by ASHWINI HULGOJI GAJAKOSH relating to a real estate redevelopment project by the Mantri Group Date:

2023.04.24 10:05:17 +0530 and the action of the Enforcement Directorate in effecting a provisional attachment of assets secured to SBICAP Ventures Ltd. As we set out in that Petition, there is a special alternate investment fund called SWAMIH meant to protect the interest of flat purchasers and to ensure that in a strictly supervised manner stalled real estate projects are brought to fruition. Funding is only for

1 SBICAP Ventures Ltd v Joint Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Bengaluru Zonal Office and Ors.

20th April 2023

4-ASWPST-10286-2023.DOC

project completion and all fund spending is strictly monitored. SBICAP was not a party to any proceedings before the Prevention of Money Laundering Act 2002 ("PMLA"). We particularly noted there was no provision of the PMLA that had an overriding charge sufficient to eclipse the rights or security of a secured creditor. We made Rule absolute.

2. The present Petition is on an identical basis regarding the same project. Indeed even the attachment order is exactly the same as in the SBI Cap case. The only difference is that the present Petitioner is the second charge holder over the very same assets. A copy of our 28th March order is annexed to the Petition from page 120 onwards at Exhibit "C".

3. For these reasons, Rule, made returnable forthwith and made absolute in the same terms, i.e., in terms of prayer clause (a) which reads as follows:

"(a) This Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari and/or any other writ, order, or direction in the nature thereof calling for the papers and proceedings before Respondent No. 2 relating to Impugned PAO dated August 11, 2022 bearing no.6 of 2022 and reference no. F.NO. ECIR/BGZO/31/2022/1666 and after examining its legality, validity and proprietary thereof quash and set aside the same."

 (Neela Gokhale, J)                                          (G. S. Patel, J)





                                 20th April 2023