Axis Bank Limited vs Sebi
- CitationAppeal No. 35 of 2020
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The four-week period for compliance in the operative directions of the December 20, 2023 judgment applies equally to the pledgee Axis Bank as to SEBI, NSE and NSDL; the operative direction in that judgment is to be read in its entirety and does not give Axis Bank immediate effect of the order. Where a tribunal's final order is silent on stay and fixes a compliance period, the operative directions must be read as a whole, and a clarificatory interpretation may be given to the order to make its intention clear, so that the time allowed for implementation governs all parties to whom the directions are addressed.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Date : 12.01.2024
Misc. Application No. 1681 of 2023 In Appeal No. 35 of 2020
Axis Bank Limited "Trishul", 3rd Floor, Opposite Samartheshwar Temple, Near Law Garden, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad- 380 006 and its corporate office at Axis House, Bombay Dyeing Mills Compound, Pandurang Budhkar Marg, ...Applicant Worli, Mumbai - 400 025.
In the matter of:
Axis Bank Limited "Trishul", 3rd Floor, Opposite Samartheshwar Temple, Near Law Garden, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad- 380 006 and its corporate office at Axis House, Bombay Dyeing Mills Compound, Pandurang Budhkar Marg, ...Appellant Worli, Mumbai - 400 025.
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. Karvy Stock Broking Ltd. Karvy Millennium, Plot No. 31-P, Nanakramguda Financial District, Gachibowli, Hyderabad - 500 032. 2
3. National Securities Depositaries Ltd. 4th Floor, "A" Wing, Trade World, Kamala Mills Compound, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai- 400 013.
4. Central Depository Services (India) Limited Marathon Futurex, A-Wing, 25th Floor, NM Joshi Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai- 400 013.
5. National Stock Exchange of India Ltd. Exchange Plaza, Plot No. C/1, G Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai- 400 051 ...Respondents
Mr. Gaurav Joshi, Senior Advocate with Mr. Neville Lashkari, Advocate i/b M/s. Dhruve Liladhar & Co. for the Applicant.
Mr. Shriraz Rustomjee, Senior Advocate with Mr. Sumit Yadav, Mr. Abhay Chauhan, Mr. Atul Kumar Agrawal, Advocates i/b The Law Point for the Respondent Nos. 1 (SEBI).
None for the Respondent Nos. 2 (Karvy Stock Broking).
Mr. Mustafa Doctor, Senior Advocate with Ms. Kinjal Shah, Ms. Etika Srivastava, Advocates i/b M/s. Rashmikant and Partners for the Respondent Nos. 3 (NSDL).
None for the Respondent Nos. 4 (CDSL).
Ms. Drishti Das, Advocate i/b Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas for the Respondent Nos. 5 (NSE). 3
ORDER:
1. Axis Bank filed a Misc. Application No. 1681 of 2023
praying to this Tribunal that it may pass appropriate orders and
directions directing the Respondents to forthwith ensure
compliance with the directions passed in this Tribunal's
judgment dated December 20, 2023 and to forthwith remove all
the lock-in and all other obstacles (including defreezing the
Demat Account No. 19502787) in the invocation of pledge of
shares and subsequent sale of the said shares by the Appellant to
the extent of their entire dues. The operative part of this
Tribunal's order dated December 20, 2023 in the Appeal Nos.
35 of 2020, 50 of 2020, 113 of 2020, 70 of 2020 and 75 of 2020
filed by Axis Bank Limited, ICICI Bank Limited, Bajaj Finance
Limited, HDFC Bank Limited and IndusInd Bank Limited
respectively is extracted below:-
"81. In view of the aforesaid, the impugned orders dated January 14, 2020 and December 13, 2019 are quashed. The appeals are allowed. The appellant Axis Bank is permitted to invoke the shares pledged in its favour in Demat Account no. 19502787 in accordance with the provisions of the Depositories Act read with the DP Regulations. A direction is given to SEBI, NSE and NSDL to restore the pledge which was made in favour of the appellants within four weeks from today. In the alternative SEBI, NSE and NSDL are directed to compensate the appellants with the value of the 4
underlined securities pledged in their favour along with interest @ 10% p.a. within the same period. In the circumstances of the case, parties shall bear their own costs."
2. The learned senior counsel for the Applicant (Axis Bank)
urged that two distinct issues were dealt by this Tribunal in its
order dated December 20, 2023. First one was in relation to
Axis Bank and second one in relation to ICICI Bank, HDFC
Bank, IndusInd Bank and Bajaj Finance Ltd. These issues are
stated in paragraphs 14 and 15 of this Tribunal's order dated
December 20, 2023 and are extracted below:-
"14. Insofar as Axis Bank is concerned this Tribunal while disposing of their appeal by an order dated December 17, 2019 had directed the parties to maintain status quo in respect of the securities in DP Account No. 19502787. Axis Bank had also filed a claim petition before the DRT Hyderabad wherein a stay order was granted in respect of transfer of pledged shares. As a result of the interim order the pledged shares are still intact and has not been encashed. On the other hand, even though the shares were pledged in favour of the other appellants, namely, ICICI Bank, HDFC Bank, IndusInd Bank and Bajaj Finance Ltd., NSDL issued a press release dated December 2, 2019 stating therein:-
"SEBI has passed Orders WTM/AB/SEBI/MIRSD/HO/35/2019 and WTM/AB/SEBI/MIRSD/HO/36/2019 in the
matter of Karvy Stock Broking Limited (KSBL). As per the directions of SEBI and under supervision of NSE, securities have been transferred from the demat account IN300394- 11458979 named Karvy Stock Broking Limited (BSE) to the demat accounts of respective 5
clients who have paid in full against these securities. The number of such clients who have received securities are 82,559."
15. NSDL without revoking or cancelling the pledge in accordance with the Depositories Act and the DP Regulations 1996 transferred the pledged shares to the clients of the broker."
3. The learned senior counsel for Applicant urged that,
accordingly, the operative part of the order in paragraph 81
should be viewed separately for two set of Appellants as the
intention of the Tribunal was to mete out different treatments
for these two set of appellants. Thus, the leeway of four weeks
was given only in case of Appellants other than Axis Bank. For
Axis Bank, the order of the Tribunal became effective
immediately and therefore there is no restriction whatsoever on
Axis Bank from invoking the pledge of shares created in its
favour and selling the shares to the extent of its full and
complete dues.
4. The learned senior counsel further urged that at the time of
pronouncement of the orders dated December 20, 2023,
different periods of stay were sought by the various
Respondents but the Tribunal did not allow any stay on the
orders. Thus, the lock-in now imposed by NSDL on the pledged 6
shares is arbitrary and violates the orders of this Tribunal.
Accordingly, the prayer to the Tribunal now is for passing
appropriate orders directing the Respondents to ensure
compliance with the directions passed by this Tribunal in its
orders dated December 20, 2023. Also, the Respondents may be
directed to lift the lock-in imposed on the pledged shares and
defreeze the Demat Account No. 19502787 so that the pledge
on the shares could be invoked in Appellant's favour and the
shares could be sold by Axis Bank to the extent of its dues.
5. The learned senior counsel for Respondent, SEBI, stated
that they have filed a Civil Appeal before the Hon'ble Supreme
Court to challenge the order of this Tribunal dated December
20, 2023. The Misc. Application of the Appellant, if allowed,
could result in the Civil Appeal before the Hon'ble Supreme
Court becoming infructuous. Opposing grant of any relief to the
Appellant, the Respondent stated that they have not committed
any breach of the directions contained in the SAT order dated
December 20, 2023 as period of four weeks given by this
Tribunal to implement the order was applicable to all
Appellants.
6. The learned senior counsel for SEBI further stated that
they did not press for stay at the time of pronouncement of 7
orders on December 20, 2023, as they were given to believe that
this Tribunal had granted four weeks time for compliance of
directions in the said order. The shares pledged to Axis Bank
have not been redeemed and status quo has been maintained
since 2019 therefore waiting for further two weeks is not going
to make any difference to the Appellant.
7. The learned senior counsel for NSDL stated that
maintaining status quo will not cause any prejudice in any
manner to the interest of the Appellant. They have already
preferred an Appeal before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and as
the Hon'ble Apex Court is seized of the matter, no relief should
be granted to the Appellant at this stage. Further, at the time of
the pronouncement of the order on December 20, 2023 all
parties were under the belief that the directions in the final order
have to be complied within four weeks therefore they too did
not press for stay of the order.
8. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, the issue
which needs to be decided is whether the four weeks allowed by
this Tribunal, in its order dated December 20, 20023, for
implementing the directions given would be applicable to
Appellant Axis Bank too. In its order dated December 20, 2023
the Tribunal has basically dealt with the core issue as to whether 8
the Respondents could have unilaterally transferred pledged
shares without the consent of the pledgee. In this regard
paragraph 72 of the order is extracted below:-
"72. We also find that the action of SEBI and NSDL to unilaterally transfer pledge shares to the clients of Karvy was wholly illegal and without jurisdiction. Such unilateral transfer of the shares without revoking the pledge is per se illegal and against the provisions of the Depositories Act and Regulation 58 of the DP Regulations. We are of the opinion that no revocation of pledge is permitted unless consent is obtained from the pledgee under Section 58(6) of the DP Regulations which in the instant case were the appellants. No such consent was taken. Regulation 58(6) of the DP Regulations states that no transfer of securities which is pledged shall be effected by a participant without the concurrence of the pledgee."
9. Having decided that the unilateral action on the part of the
Respondents was illegal and without jurisdiction, the Tribunal
went on to give separate directions for the Appellant Axis Bank
and for other Appellants. The separate directions were required
due to the status of pledged shares as for the shares pledged to
Axis Bank this Tribunal had directed parties to maintain status
quo vide its order dated December 17, 2019 while for the other
Appellants the pledged shares had been transferred to the clients
of the broker by the Respondents. The order needs to be read in
totality. Accordingly, it is clarified that four weeks from the
date of the order were available both to Appellant Axis Bank 9
and to SEBI, NSE and NSDL to implement the directions given
by this Tribunal in its order dated December 20, 2023. Further,
while delivering the judgment, in the interest of justice, the
Tribunal was conscious of not depriving the parties the right to
challenge the order in the higher court, if so desired.
10. The Misc. Application is disposed off on the above terms
with no order as to costs.
Ms. Meera Swarup Technical Member
12.01.2024 MADHUKAR Digitally signed by MADHUKAR SHAMRAO SHAMRAO BHALBAR
msb BHALBAR Date: 2024.01.12 13:19:22 +05'30'
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