Devendra Suresh Gupta vs Sebi

Date : 02.03.2021

Misc. Application No. 455 of 2019 And Appeal No. 368 of 2019

Devendra Suresh Gupta ...Appellant

Versus

Securities and Exchange Board of India ...Respondent

Mr. Vikas Bengani, Advocate for the Appellant.

Mr. Anubhav Ghosh, Advocate with Mr. Ravishekhar Pandey, Advocate i/b The Law Point for the Respondent.

ORDER:

1. The appellant has challenged the order dated May 18,

2018. There is a delay of 316 days and accordingly an

application for condonation of delay has been filed. The ground

urged is, that the original copy of the impugned order was never

served upon the appellant and that he came to know only when

his accounts were frozen in February 2019, whereupon he

applied for a certified copy which was made available on March

14, 2019. The appeal was thereafter filed in May 2019. It was 2

urged that there is no undue delay in the filing of the appeal and

the delay, if any, is liable to be condoned.

2. The respondent has filed a reply contending that the

original copy of the order dated May 18, 2018 was duly served

on May 24, 2018. Proof of service has been filed by the

respondent by way of the acknowledgement card. The signature

on the acknowledgement card has been vehemently disputed by

the appellant contending that this signature does not belong to

any member of their family. In support of this contention the

signatures of the family members have been verified and

attested from various authorities, such as, comparison with the

PAN card, certificate issued from the bank etc.

3. In the light of the aforesaid, we have given out thoughtful

consideration in the matter. We are of the opinion that benefit

has to be given to the appellant since the proof of receipt of the

envelope is disputed. Accordingly, giving this benefit we

condone the delay and allow the application.

4. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we direct

the respondent to file a reply within three weeks from today.

Two weeks thereafter to the appellant to file a rejoinder. The

matter would be listed on April 12, 2021.

3

5. Parties are directed to take instructions from the Registrar

48 hours before the date fixed in order to find out as to whether

the matter would be taken up for hearing through video

conference or through physical hearing.

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 Presiding Officer

Justice M.T. Joshi Judicial Member 02.03.2021 RAJALAK Digitally signed by RAJALAKSHMI H SHMI H NAIR Date: 2021.03.05 msb NAIR 10:35:52 +05'30'