Mr. Jitendra Kumar Bhatia vs Sebi
- CitationReview Application No. 76 of 2022
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The delay in filing a review application may be condoned only on a ground that is genuinely made out on the facts; a ground that is contradicted by the record, such as an alleged bereavement that predated the order sought to be reviewed, is untenable and cannot justify condonation, and where the condonation application fails, the review application falls with it.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Date of Decision : 30.01.2023
Misc. Application No. 1589 of 2022 And Misc. Application No. 1590 of 2022 And Review Application No. 76 of 2022 In Appeal No. 412 of 2019 Mr. Jitendra Kumar Bhatia A-750, Elixir M K City, ..... Applicant Sirol Road, Gwalior - 474 006. (Org. Appellant)
Versus
Securities & Exchange Board of India SEBI Bhavan, Plot No. C-4A, G Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai - 400 051. ... Respondent
Mr. Shailesh Kumar, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr. Mihir Mody, Advocate with Mr. Arnav Misra, Mr. Mayur Jaisingh, Advocates i/b. K Ashar & Co. for the Respondent.
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 applicant. This
Tribunal by an order dated October 21, 2021 dismissed the appeal of
the appellant. The review application was filed on November 28,
2022. There is a delay of 373 days in the filing of the Review 2
Application and accordingly an application of condonation of delay
has also been filed. The ground urged is that the appellant's wife had
died and he could not get out of this trauma. Further, his bank
account was frozen and, therefore, he had to arrange funds for filing
the review application which took time.
2. We find that the appellant's wife had died in the year 2020,
much before the passing of the order by this Tribunal. Therefore,
such ground is untenable and on this score, we find that there is an
inordinate delay in the filing of the appeal. The condonation of delay
application is rejected, as a result of which review application is also
dismissed.
3. 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. Certified copy of this order is
also available from the Registry on payment of usual charges.
Justice Tarun Agarwala Presiding Officer
Justice M. T. Joshi Judicial Member PRAMILA Digitally signed by PRAMILA 30.01.2023 TANAJI TANAJI MISAL Date: 2023.01.31 PTM MISAL 16:34:50 +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