Rami Reddy Vs Deputy Director (Appellate Tribunal Under SAFEMA Delhi)
Cash-Paid Property Found Dubious – Unregistered ₹80 Lakh Cash Deal Fails – Tribunal Rejects Bona Fide Purchaser Claim
Appellant challenged the Adjudicating Authority’s order dated 08.06.2018 confirming Provisional Attachment Order No. 03/2017 under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA), covering two Hyderabad properties allegedly linked to the Future Maker Life Care Ltd. Ponzi scheme case.
Rami Reddy claimed he was a bona fide purchaser of the attached penthouse through an unregistered agreement to sell dated 06.08.2011, having paid ₹80 lakh in cash out of ₹85 lakh total consideration. He stated he later filed a civil suit for specific performance after the vendor failed to execute the sale deed. He denied any connection with the accused or knowledge of the fraudulent scheme.
Enforcement Directorate (ED) countered that the alleged sale agreement was unregistered, unnotarized, & suspiciously ante-dated; no proof of ₹80 lakh source or ITRs was produced, & it was implausible that 90% of sale value was paid in cash without registration. ED argued the “sale” was a device to shield tainted assets.
Tribunal held that the Appellant failed to prove the genuineness of the transaction or the source of funds & that his conduct suggested a collusive attempt to protect property linked to money laundering. It also observed that the “bona fide purchaser” claim could be adjudicated only by the Special PMLA Court upon detailed evidence.
