Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Arihant India Limited vs Sebi

Securities Appellate Tribunal1 June 2018J.P. Devadhar

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

The penalty order and recovery notice are set aside because the penalty was passed against the appellant, but the notices were inadvertently sent to the address of a Kolkata company; a recovery notice founded on a penalty order not served on the person against whom it runs cannot stand, and the authority must afresh pass an order after affording the appellant an opportunity of hearing.

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

Judgment

As delivered

BEFORE THE SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI Date of Decision: 01/06/2018

Appeal No.149 of 2018

Arihant India Limited C/o. Khairatilal & Sons, 80, Janpath, New Delhi - 110 001. ... Appellant

Versus

1.

The Adjudicating Officer, SEBI, E.R.O., Kolkata.

Eastern Regional Office, L&T Chamber, 16, Camac Street, Kolkata - 700 017.

2. The Recovery Officer & Dy. General Manager, SEBI, E.R.O. Kolkata.

Eastern Regional Office, L&T Chamber, 16, Camac Street, Kolkata - 700 017. ... Respondents

Ms. Ishita Merchant a/w Ms. Akshaya Puthran, Advocates i/b S.K. Sanghi & Co. for the Appellant.

Mr. Chirag Bhavsar, Advocate i/b MDP & Partners for Respondents.

CORAM : Justice J.P. Devadhar, Presiding Officer Dr. C.K.G. Nair, Member

Per : Justice J.P. Devadhar (Oral)

1. This appeal is basically filed to challenge the recovery notice

issued by the Recovery Officer of Securities and Exchange Board of

India ("SEBI" for short) on 8th March, 2018. 2

2. Appellant contends that the penalty order passed by the

Adjudicating Officer ("AO" for short) of SEBI is in respect of a company

situated at Kolkata whereas the impugned recovery notice is issued by

the Recovery Officer of SEBI against the appellant situated at New

Delhi.

3. Counsel for SEBI states that the penalty order was in fact passed

against the appellant, however, inadvertently notices were sent to the

address of a company situated in Kolkata.

4. In these circumstances, we set aside the penalty order dated 12th

August, 2014 and also the impugned recovery notice dated 8th March,

2018 and direct SEBI to pass fresh order in accordance with law after

giving an opportunity of hearing to the appellant.

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

costs.

Sd/-

Justice J.P. Devadhar Presiding Officer

Sd/-

Dr. C.K.G. Nair Member 01/06/2018 prepared & compared by-dg

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