Arvind Parasramka vs Sebi

Date of Decision: 06.01.2021

Appeal No. 538 of 2020

Arvind Parasramka 26, Belvedere Road, Kolkata- 700 027 ...Appellant

Versus

1.

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

2. Calcutta Investment Company Limited 9, Brabourne Road, Kolkata- 700 001

3. Ramesh Chandra Tapuriah 13, Raja Santosh Road, Shrachi Manor, Kolkata- 700 027

4. Govind Jethalia 41, Kali Kishna Tagore Street, Burabazaar, Kolkata- 700 007

5. Pushpa Devi Goenka 18, Belvedere Road, Kolkata- 700 027

6. Jyoti Goenka

7. Sandhya Goenka 18, Belvedere Road, Kolkata- 700 027

8. Shravan Kumar Bagla The Empire Tower- 2, 4-C, 16A, Gurusaday Road, Ballygunge, Kolkata- 700 019 2

9. Yogamaya Arts Private Limited 9, Brabourne Road, 3rd Floor, Kolkata- 700 001

10. Shreevash Ghosh 108, B. N. Sarani, Barrackpore (M), North 24, Parganas, Kolkata- 700 122

11. Sourish Kumar Seal 353, College Road, Hooghly, Chinsurah (M), Kolkata- 712 101

12. Pradeep Kanoria 690, Lake Town, Block A, South Dum Dum, Kolkata- 700 089

13. Susweta Malakar Yogamaya Arts Private Limited, 9, Brabourne Road, 3rd Floor, Kolkata- 700 001

14. Calcutta Stock Exchange 7, Lyons Range, Dalhousie, Kolkata- 700 001 ...Respondents

Mr. Kazan Shroff, Advocate with Ms. Swapna Roopavate and Mr. Chirag Sarawagi, Advocates i/b Ms. Gauri Sakhardande, Advocate for the Appellant.

Mr. Pradeep Sancheti, Senior Advocate with Mr. Ravishekhar Pandey, Advocate i/b The Law Point for Respondent No. 1

Mr. Mainak Bose, Advocate with Mr. Nikhil Jhunjhunwala, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 2 & 5.

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) 3

1. We have heard Mr. Shroff, the learned counsel for the

appellant and Mr. Sancheti, and Mr. Bose, the learned senior

counsel/ learned counsel appearing for the Securities and

Exchange Board of India ("SEBI" for convenience) and the

private respondents.

2. The present appeal has been filed against the disposal of

the complaint dated September 28, 2020 on the SCORES

platform. The facts leading to the filing of the present appeal is,

that the appellant made a complaint alleging that 2000 shares of

the company has been transferred in favour of respondent no. 9

in 2015 which was in violation of the Companies Act, 1956, in

as much, as the company became a suspended company and

could not have transferred these shares. The complaint was

disposed of on several dates by SEBI contending that SEBI does

not deal with suspended companies and, in any case, a petition

has been filed by the appellant before the National Company

Law Tribunal ("NCLT" for convenience) which is pending

consideration.

3. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties through

video conference, we find that admittedly on the same issue the 4

appellant had preferred a petition before the NCLT, Kolkata

where NCLT had directed SEBI to furnish a report. It has been

stated at the bar that SEBI has submitted a report and the said

report is pending consideration before the NCLT.

4. In the light of the aforesaid, we are of the opinion that

SEBI was justified in disposing of the complaint at this stage on

the ground that the matter is pending before the NCLT and is

subjudice. Even though, the jurisdiction of NCLT and SEBI are

different but at the moment the alleged transfer whether it is

correct or incorrect is pending consideration before NCLT and

therefore it is not appropriate for SEBI to dwell into these

allegations at this stage.

5. We also find that the appellant is neither a shareholder nor

a buyer or seller of the shares at this stage. It seems that the

appellant had separately purchased some shares of the company

which has not as yet been accepted by the company and his

name has not yet been entered as a shareholder in the register

maintained by the company. Consequently, at this stage the

appellant being an outsider could not have filed the complaint

before SEBI. The appeal, therefore, fails and is dismissed

summarily at the admission stage itself. 5

6. 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

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 RAJALAKS Digitally signed by RAJALAKSHMI H NAIR Presiding Officer HMI H NAIR Date: 2021.01.07 15:27:28 +05'30'

Dr. C.K.G. Nair Member

Justice M. T. Joshi Judicial Member 06.01.2021 PK