Gangotri Textiles Limited & Ors. vs Sebi
- CitationAppeal No.457 of 2018
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The application for condonation of delay is allowed on the ground that the appellants have shown sufficient cause: the delay is explained by the appellants being based in Coimbatore and taking time to engage counsel in Mumbai, and by the company's financial crisis, including erosion of net worth and the sale of its unit, which caused the company's functioning to come to a standstill, as supported by an additional affidavit.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Date : 25.3.2019
Misc. Application No.402 of 2018 And Appeal No.457 of 2018
1.
Gangotri Textiles Limited 25-A, Venkatachalam Co-op. Colony, R.S. Puram, Coimbatore-641002.
2. Manoj Kumar Tiberewal 401, Belleza Apartment, 258 Alagesan Road, Saibaba Colony Post, Coimbatore-641011, Tamil Nadu
3. Anita Tibrewal 401, Belleza Apartment, 258 Alagesan Road, Saibaba Colony Post, Coimbatore - 641011, Tamil Nadu
4. Mayank Tibrewal 401, Belleza Apartment, 258 Alagesan Road, Saibaba Colony Post, Coimbatore - 641011, Tamil Nadu
5. Umang Tibrewal 401, Belleza Apartment, 258 Alagesan Road, Saibaba Colony Post, Coimbatore - 641011, Tamil Nadu ..... Appellants
Versus
National Stock Exchange of India Ltd. Exchange Plaza, C-1, Block G, Bandra Kurla Complex, Badra (E), Mumbai-400051. ..... Respondent 2
Ms. Rishika Harish, Advocate with Ms. Nirali Mehta, PCS i/b. Mindspright Legal for the Appellants.
Mr. Rashid Boatwalla, Advocate with Ms. Shreya Anuwal, Advocate i/b. Manilal Kher Ambalal & Co. for the Respondent.
CORAM: Justice Tarun Agarwala, Presiding Officer Dr. C.K.G. Nair, Member Justice M.T. Joshi, Judicial Member
Per : Justice Tarun Agarwala (Oral)
1. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. Two orders
have been challenged in this appeal. There is a delay of 436 and
174 days respectively in questioning the veracity and legality of
the orders dated 5th July, 2017 and 26th March, 2018. The
grounds urged are that the appellants are based in Coimbatore
and it took them some time to engage an Advocate in Mumbai
for the purpose of filing the appeal. Further, the company was
facing a financial crisis and it took some time to arrange the
necessary funds.
2. In support of this contention an additional affidavit has also
been filed indicating that the net worth of the company eroded
during the financial year 2012-13 as a result the company became
a sick industry and eventually the unit of the company was sold
and the functioning of the company had come to a standstill.
3. In the light of the aforesaid, we find that adequate reasons
have been indicated in the application. Sufficient cause has been 3
shown and consequently the application is allowed. The delay in
filing the appeal is condoned subject to payment of cost which
we compute at Rs.50,000/-. The said amount shall be deposited
before the Registrar of this Tribunal within a period of four
weeks.
3. List for admission on 20th May, 2019.
Sd/-
Justice Tarun Agarwala Presiding Officer
Sd/-
Dr. C. K. G. Nair Member
Sd/-
Justice M.T. Joshi Judicial Member
25.3.2019 Prepared and compared by 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