Bharat J. Patel vs Sebi

Date of Decision : 08.08.2016 Misc. Application No. 150 of 2016 And Appeal No. 86 of 2016 Bharat J. Patel 2, Divya Darshan, N.S. Road No. 5, JVPD Scheme, Vile Parle, Mumbai - 400 058. ...Appellant

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

Mr. P.N. Modi, Senior Advocate with Mr. Neville Lashkari and Mr. Rihal Kazi, Advocates i/b M & M Legal Venturs for the Appellant.

Mr. J.P. Sen, Senior Advocate with Mr. Aditya Chitale and Mr. Anubhav Ghosh, Advocates i/b The Law Point for the Respondent.

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

Misc. Application No 150 of 2016:-

By this Misc. Application appellant seeks condonation of 179 days

delay in filing the appeal. With the consent of both the parties the delay is

condoned. Accordingly, Misc. Application is disposed of with no order as to

costs.

Appeal No. 86 of 2016:-

1.

This appeal is filed to challenge the ex-parte ad-interim order passed

by the Whole Time Member ('WTM' for short) of Securities and Exchange

Board of India ('SEBI' for short) dated August 20, 2015. By the said order,

appellant and various other entities are restrained from buying, selling or 2

dealing in the securities market, either directly or indirectly, in any manner

till further directions. By the said order, the appellant was called upon to file

objections, if any, against the impugned order, within 21 days from

August 20, 2015.

2. Grievance of the appellant is that by a letter dated November 23,

2015 appellant had objected to the impugned order passed against the

appellant for the reasons set out therein and had alternatively pleaded that

the appellant be permitted to continue trading in the cash segment.

3. Counsel for the appellant further submitted that personal hearing was

given to the appellant on December 31, 2015 and on January 25, 2016,

however, till date no order is passed by the WTM of SEBI.

4. Counsel for SEBI, on instruction, states that appropriate order on

merits and in accordance with law would be passed within a period of two

weeks from today, if necessary by giving a fresh opportunity of hearing to

the appellant.

5. Counsel for the appellant states that the appellant is not desirous of

availing fresh opportunity of hearing before the WTM of SEBI.

6. In these circumstances, as a last chance, two weeks' time is granted to

the WTM of SEBI for passing the order. If the WTM of SEBI deems it fit to

confirm the ex-parte ad-interim order, then the WTM of SEBI shall consider

the alternate plea of the appellant to trade in the cash segment in the light of

the order of this Tribunal in Appeal No. 50 of 2016 dated March 4, 2016.

7. It is made clear that if the WTM of SEBI fails to pass an order within

two weeks from today then the ex-parte ad-interim order dated 3

August 20, 2015 qua the appellant shall come to an end forthwith without

reference to this tribunal.

8. Appeal is disposed of in the above terms with no order as to costs.

Sd/-

Justice J.P. Devadhar Presiding Officer

Sd/-

Dr. C.K.G. Nair Member

08.08.2016 Prepared and compared by;

msb