Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Jindal Cotex Limited & Ors. vs Sebi

Securities Appellate Tribunal19 January 2023

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

The Tribunal condones a delay in filing an appeal where the appellants relied on the Supreme Court's suo motu orders extending limitation during the pandemic, and where the Tribunal considered that the interests of justice warrant condonation, conditional on payment of costs.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

BEFORE THE SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNALMUMBAI

Date: 19.01.2023

Misc. Application No. 1805 of 2022 And Misc. Application No. 1806 of 2022 And Appeal No. 76 of 2023

Jindal Cotex Limited & Ors. ...Appellants

Versus

Securities and Exchange Board of India ...Respondent

Mr. P.N. Modi, Senior Advocate with Ms. Kalpana Desai, Mr. Arnav Tandon, Advocates and Ms. Nikita Vijay i/b Mr. Ravi Prakash, Advocate, Corporate Professionals, Advisors and Advocates for the Appellants.

Mr. Sumit Rai, Advocate with Mr. Aditya Sarangarajan, Advocate i/b Mansukhlal Hiralal & Co. for the Respondent.

ORDER:

1. Since the appeal has been taken up for consideration, the

urgency application is disposed of.

2. The present appeal has been filed against the order of the

Adjudicating Officer ("AO" for convenience) of the Securities

and Exchange Board of India ("SEBI" for convenience) dated 2 January 23, 2020 wherein different quantum of penalties has

been imposed upon the appellants. There is a delay in the filing

of the appeal and accordingly an application for condonation of

delay has been filed.

3. This application for condonation of delay has been

vehemently opposed by the learned counsel for the respondent.

4. We find that according to the appellants they only came to

know of the impugned order on June 13, 2020 when the

gatekeeper of the premises informed them during the pandemic

period. The appellants have also relied upon the orders of the

Supreme Court in suo moto writ petition (civil) no(s). 3/2020

dated 23rd March, 2020, March 08, 2021, April 27, 2021 and

January 10, 2022. Eventually the appeal was filed before the

registry on this Tribunal on December 31, 2022.

5. The learned senior counsel contended that if the period as

per the Supreme Court order is excluded there is only a delay of

215 days in the filing of the appeal and for the reasons stated in

the application, the delay may be condoned.

6. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent

contended that on the same issue the Whole Time Member had 3 passed an order dated January 24, 2019 in which the appellants

were debarred from accessing the securities market for the

period of 5 years. This order was challenged before this

Tribunal in Appeal No. 376 of 2019 which was dismissed by

judgement dated February 05, 2020. The appellants were well

aware of the dismissal of the appeal on the finding of facts and

consequently chose not to file an appeal but now in view of the

several orders passed by this Tribunal in other appeals reducing

the penalty the appellants are now coming before this Tribunal

seeking a similar relief. It was also urged that there is an undue

delay in the filing of the appeal which should not be condoned.

7. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and in

view of the order of the Supreme Court of India, we are of the

opinion that in the larger interest of justice the delay in the filing

of the appeal should be condoned. We accordingly condone the

delay on payment of cost of Rs. 10 lakhs before the Registrar of

this Tribunal which shall be deposited by the appellants on or

before January 31, 2023.

8. List for admission on February 06, 2023.

9. This order will be digitally signed by the Private Secretary

on behalf of the bench and all concerned parties are directed to 4 act on the digitally signed copy of this 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 19.01.2023 PRERNA Digitally by PRERNA signed

PK MANISH MANISH KHARE Date: 2023.01.20 KHARE 10:46:02 +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