Anupam D. Dighe (Huf) vs Sebi
- CitationAppeal No. 80 of 2016
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
A shareholder is not a person aggrieved by a stock exchange notice suspending trading in a listed company's shares where that company has itself elected not to challenge the notice and has accepted that trading will remain suspended until its non-compliant audit report is submitted, so that the shareholder's appeal against the notice, under the Securities Appellate Tribunal's jurisdiction, is dismissed for want of merit.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Date of Decision : 04.04.2016
Appeal No. 80 of 2016
Anupam D. Dighe (HUF) 3/207 Mehta Park, Bhagoji Keer Road, Mahim, Mumbai - 400 016. ...Appellant
Versus
1.
BSE Ltd.
Phiroze Jeejeebhoy Towers, Dalal Street, Mumbai - 400 001.
2. High Ground Enterprise Ltd. Office No. 2, Om Heera Panna Mall, 2nd Floor, Oshiwara, Andheri (West), Mumbai - 400 053.
3. CMI Ltd.
C-483, Yojna Vihar, Delhi - 110 092. ...Respondents
Mr. Vishal Jathar, Advocate i/b India Law Alliance for the Appellant.
Mr. Ajay Khaire, Advocate i/b The Law Point for Respondent No. 1.
None for Respondent Nos. 2 & 3.
CORAM : Justice J.P. Devadhar, Presiding Officer Jog Singh, Member Dr. C.K.G. Nair, Member
Per : J.P. Devadhar (Oral)
1. Appellant is an investor and shareholder of Respondent No. 2 and 3.
Appellant claims to be aggrieved by the notice issued by BSE Ltd. on March
28, 2016 whereby it is informed that the trading of the 31 listed entities
including Respondent No. 2 and 3 shall be suspended with effect from
March 31, 2016.
2
2. Respondent No. 2 had filed an Appeal to challenge BSE notice dated
March 28, 2016 and the said appeal has already been disposed of on
March 30, 2016. Admittedly, till date Respondent No. 3 has chosen not to
challenge the notice of BSE dated March 28, 2016. In such a case, if the
trading in the shares of Respondent No. 3 is suspended on account of its
failure to submit audit report as demanded by BSE and if the Respondent
No. 3 is ready to undergo suspension in the trading of its shares till the audit
report is submitted, then the appellant shareholder cannot be said to be
aggrieved by the notice for suspension issued by BSE on March 28, 2016.
3. In the result, we see no merit in this appeal and same is dismissed
with no order as to costs.
Sd/-
Justice J.P. Devadhar Presiding Officer
Sd/-
Jog Singh Member
Sd/-
Dr. C.K.G. Nair Member
04.04.2016 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