Alok Bhargava vs Sebi
- CitationAppeal No. 484 of 2020
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The appeal is dismissed on the sole ground that the matter is squarely covered by the Tribunal's earlier decisions in Global Earth Properties and Developers Pvt. Ltd. v. SEBI and R S Ispat v. SEBI, and the judgment gives no reasoning of its own on the merits of the penalty.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Alok Bhargava New No. 60 (Old No. 121), Sterling Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai - 600 034. ...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
Mr. Joby Mathew, Advocate with Mr. Anshuman Sugla, Advocate i/b Joby Mathew & Associates for the Appellant.
Mr. Abhiraj Arora, Advocate i/b ELP for the Respondent.
CORAM: Justice Tarun Agarwala, Presiding Officer Dr. C.K.G. Nair, Member Justice M.T. Joshi, Judicial Member
Per: Justice Tarun Agarwala, Presiding Officer (Oral) 2
1.
There is a delay in the filing of the appeal. For the reasons
stated in the application, the delay in the filing of the appeal is
condoned. The application is allowed.
2. The present appeal has been filed against the order dated
March 17, 2020 passed by the Adjudicating Officer ('AO' for
short) of the Securities and Exchange Board of India ('SEBI'
for short) imposing a penalty of Rs. 8.30 lakh.
3. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties through
video conference, we are of the opinion that the matter is
squarely covered by the decision of this Tribunal in the matters
of Global Earth Properties and Developers Pvt. Ltd. vs
Securities and Exchange Board of India (Appeal No. 212 of
2020 decided on September 14, 2020) and R S Ispat vs
Securities and Exchange Board of India (Appeal No. 25 of
2019 decided on September 17, 2020).
4. The appeal is consequently dismissed with no order as to
costs.
5. The present matter was heard through video conference
due to Covid-19 pandemic. At this stage it is not possible to sign
a copy of this order nor a certified copy of this order could be
issued by the registry. In these circumstances, this order will be 3
digitally signed by the Private Secretary on behalf of the bench
and all concerned parties are directed to act on the digitally
signed copy of this order. Parties will act on production of a
digitally signed copy sent by fax and/or email.
Justice Tarun Agarwala Digitally signed by RAJALAKS RAJALAKSHMI H NAIR Presiding Officer HMI H NAIR Date: 2021.01.05 11:09:11 +05'30'
Dr. C.K.G. Nair Member
Justice M.T. Joshi Judicial Member 04.01.2021 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