Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Megha Anil Udar & Anr. vs Sebi

Securities Appellate Tribunal22 April 2021Tarun Agarwala

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

A complaint raising a dispute over unauthorised transactions executed through the complainant's demat account by a broker, where the transactions were effected through Delivery Instruction Slips and the grievance is in substance a personal dispute with the broker, is a commercial dispute that cannot be adjudicated on the SCORES grievance redress platform. Where the authority has disposed of a complaint on that basis and no manifest error is shown in its disposal, the appeal against the rejection of the review application fails and is dismissed.

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

Judgment

As delivered

BEFORE THE SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNALMUMBAI

Date of Decision: 22.04.2021

Misc. Application No.190 of 2021 (Exemption from filing certified copy) And Appeal No. 183 of 2021

1.

Megha Anil Udar

2. Anil Prabhakar Udar

1803, Imperial Tower-1, Baner, Pune 411 045. ...Appellants

Versus

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

2. Central Depository Services (India) Ltd. Marathon Futurex, A - Wing, 25th Floor, N. M. Joshi Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai - 400 013.

3. BOI Shareholding Ltd.

70-80, Bank of India Building, 4th Floor, M. G. Road, Fort, Mumbai - 400 001. ...Respondents

Dr. S. K. Khattri, Advocate for the Appellants.

Mr. Vishal Kanade, Advocate with Mr. Mihir Mody and Mr. Arnav Misra, Advocates i/b K. Ashar & Co. for Respondent No. 1 (SEBI).

2 Ms. Shilpita Sahoo, Authorized Representative for Respondent No. 2 (CDSL).

Mr. Peter D'Souza, Authorized Representative for Respondent No. 3

CORAM: Justice Tarun Agarwala, Presiding Officer Justice M. T. Joshi, Judicial Member

Per: Justice Tarun Agarwala, Presiding Officer (Oral)

1. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. The

present appeal has been filed against the order dated February

04, 2021 by which the review application of the appellants have

been rejected on the Securities and Exchange Board of India

Complaints Redress System ("SCORES") platform by a

reasoned order. An exemption application has been filed

praying for exemption to file the certified copy of the order.

The exemption application is allowed.

2. Having heard the learned counsel for the appellants, we

find that the appellant has prayed for the following reliefs:-

"6. In view of the aforesaid facts and submissions, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to:-

3 (a) Set aside the impugned order dated 4.2.2021 of the Respondent no. 1.

(b) Hold that all the three Respondents have neither protected nor safeguarded the interests of the Appellants and that they deprived the Appellants of their right to impartial enquiries and that they violated relevant Rules and Regulations and committed deficiency in service.

(c) Direct the Respondent nos. 1 & 2 to annul the transfer of shares from the Demat account of the Appellants based on DIS no. 749163 on 28.2.2020 and to retransfer those shares back to the account of the Appellants.

(d) Award a lump sum compensation to the Appellants to defray the expenses incurred by them in earlier attempts at redressal of these grievances and to compensate them for the mental anguish, emotional pain and harassment inflicted on them by the Respondents.

(e) Award the cost of litigation in favour of the Appellants against the Respondents herein.

4 (f) Pass such further and other orders as this Honb'le Tribunal may deem fit in its wisdom."

3. The authority while disposing of the review application

found that the transaction executed from the demat account of

the appellants were done through Delivery Instruction Slips

(DIS). The fact that the broker of the appellants had

misrepresented the appellants and had executed certain

transactions without the appellants authority becomes a personal

dispute between the appellants and his broker and thus such

commercial dispute cannot be adjudicated on the SCORES

platform.

4. Consequently, we do not find any manifest error in the

disposal of the complaint made by the respondents on the

SCORES platform. The appeal fails and is dismissed with no

order as to costs.

5. 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 5

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 RAJALA Digitally by signed Judicial Member 22.04.2021 KSHMI NAIR RAJALAKSHMI H

PK Date: 2021.04.26 H NAIR 16:44:23 +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