Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Akg Securities & Consultancy Ltd. vs Sebi

Securities Appellate Tribunal22 March 2016J.P. Devadhar

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

The Adjudicating Officer's order passed ex parte, in which the Adjudicating Officer failed to consider its own earlier decision in the appellant's case on similar facts holding the charges unestablished, cannot stand; such an order is liable to be quashed and the matter restored to the Adjudicating Officer for a fresh decision on merits in accordance with law, with all contentions of both parties kept open.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

BEFORE THE SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNALMUMBAI

Date of Decision : 22.03.2016

Appeal No. 318 of 2014

AKG Securities & Consultancy Ltd. 3776/309 Nirman Market, NS Marg, Daria Ganj, New Delhi - 110 002. ...Appellant

Versus

Securities and Exchange Board of India, SEBI Bhavan, Plot No. C-4A, G-Block, Bandra-Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai - 400 051. ...Respondent

Ms. Rishika Harish, Advocate with Mr. Amit Dey, Advocate for the Appellant.

Mr. Kumar Desai, Advocate with Mr. Tomu Francis, Advocate for the Respondent.

CORAM : Justice J.P. Devadhar, Presiding Officer Jog Singh, Member

Per : J.P. Devadhar (Oral)

1.

This appeal is filed to challenge the order passed by the Adjudicating

Officer of Securities and Exchange Board of India ('SEBI' for short) on

June 30, 2014 whereby penalty of Rs. 10 lac is imposed upon the appellant

u/s 15HA of the SEBI Act, 1992.

2. It is not in dispute that the impugned order is an ex-parte order.

Counsel for SEBI submitted that inspite of notice, the appellant failed to

appear for personal hearing and hence the ex-parte order is passed. 2

3. It is not in dispute that in similar circumstances, the Adjudicating

Officer of SEBI in assessee's own case has held that the charges do not

stand established. However, the said decision has not been considered while

passing the order impugned in the present appeal.

4. In this view of the matter the impugned order dated June 30, 2014 is

quashed and set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the

Adjudicating Officer of SEBI for passing fresh order on merits and in

accordance with law. All contentions of both parties are kept open.

5. Appeal is disposed of in the above terms with no order as to costs.

Sd/-

Justice J.P. Devadhar Presiding Officer

Sd/-

Jog Singh Member

22.03.2016 Prepared and compared by:

msb

This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.

Research this judgment with Miss Lucy

Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.

Try Miss Lucy free