Bharat Babubhai Trivedi vs Sebi
- CitationAppeal No.438 of 2023
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Tribunal condones the delay in filing the appeal on the reasons stated in the application. Where the controversy in an appeal is squarely covered by an earlier decision of the Tribunal, the Tribunal may follow that decision in disposing of the appeal without independent reasoning on the merits. An adjudicating order passed without affording the affected party a proper opportunity of hearing cannot be sustained, and is liable to be quashed insofar as that party is concerned. Where an impugned order is quashed for want of a proper opportunity of hearing, the appropriate course is to remit the matter to the Adjudicating Officer to decide afresh in accordance with law.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Date of Decision: 16.5.2023
Misc. Application No.654 of 2023 And Appeal No.438 of 2023
Bharat Babubhai Trivedi D/4-77, 'Shashwat', Sector 3-C, Opp. Amba School, Amba Township Pvt. Ltd., Trimandir Sankul, Dist:-Gandhinagar, Adalaj - 382421 (Gujarat). ...Appellant
Versus
Securities and Exchange Board of India SEBI Bhavan, Plot No.C-4A, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai - 400051. ...Respondent
Mr. Kunal Katariya, Advocate with Mr. Mahir Shah, Advocate i/b. Triad Law Chambers for the Appellant.
Mr. Suraj Surjit Chaudhary, Advocate with Mr. Aditya Sarangarajan and Ms. Veena Hari, Advocates i/b. Mansukhlal Hiralal & Co. for the Respondent.
CORAM: Justice Tarun Agarwala, Presiding Officer Ms. Meera Swarup, Technical Member
Per: Justice Tarun Agarwala, Presiding Officer (Oral) 2
1.
For the reasons stated in the application, the delay in
the filing of the appeal is condoned. The application is
allowed.
2. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we of
the opinion that the controversy involved in the present
appeal is squarely covered by a decision of this Tribunal
in Mr. K. Murugavel vs. SEBI, Appeal No.61 of 2023.
3. In view of the aforesaid and in the absence of proper
opportunity of hearing being granted to the appellant the
impugned order cannot be sustained and is quashed
insofar as the appellant is concerned. The matter is
remitted to the Adjudicating Officer to decide the matter
afresh in accordance with law.
4. In this regard, the appellant shall appear before the
Adjudicating Officer on 5th June, 2023 on which date the
matter will proceed in accordance with law.
5. 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 3
order. Certified copy of this order is also available from
the Registry on payment of usual charges.
Justice Tarun Agarwala Presiding Officer
Ms. Meera Swarup Technical Member RAJALAKS Digitally signed by HMI RAJALAKSHMI 16.5.2023 HARISH HARISH NAIR NAIR Date: 2023.05.25 15:15:58 +05'30' RHN
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