Mr. Nihal Siddharth Bhekare vs Sebi

Date of Decision: 13.09.2021

Misc. Application No. 996 of 2021 And Appeal No. 03 of 2021

Mr. Nihal Siddharth Bhekare F-6, Vinayak Nagar, Yashwant Nagar, Road No. 2, Near Bhawani Mata Mandir, Teen Dongri, Goregaon West, Mumbai- 400 104 ...Appellant

Versus

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

Ms. Valentina Sampson, Advocate i/b DKS Associates for the Appellant.

Ms. Nidhi Singh, Advocate with Ms. Aditi Palnitkar, Ms. Binjal Samani and Ms. Moksha Kothari, Advocates i/b Vidhii Partners for the Respondent.

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

Per: Justice Tarun Agarwala, Presiding Officer (Oral)

1.

The present appeal has been filed against the order dated

November 28, 2019 whereby a penalty of Rs. 2 lakhs has been

imposed. There is a delay of 39 days in the filing of the appeal. 2

For the reasons stated in the application, the delay is condoned.

The delay application is allowed.

2. It has been urged that the impugned order is an ex-parte

order as the show cause notice was neither served nor any

opportunity of hearing was provided to the appellant. It was

urged that in paragraph 14 of the impugned order it has been

stated that even the affixation was not made at the last known

address of the appellant. This fact has been disputed by the

respondents and they have filed a compilation of documents

which we have perused. We find that when the summons

relating to the show cause notice was returned undelivered the

said show cause notice was affixed at the address of the

appellant. The signatures of two witnesses are recorded in the

affixation notice. We do not find any reason to disbelieve this

affixation. Thus, the appellant was duly served with the show

cause notice by affixation. Further, notice of hearing was also

given in the newspapers and thereafter the impugned order was

passed. Considering the aforesaid, we are satisfied that the

appellant was duly served.

3. The appeal fails and is dismissed with no order as to

costs.

3

4. 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 13.09.2021 RAJALA Digitally by signed

PK KSHMI NAIR RAJALAKSHMI H

Date: 2021.09.14 H NAIR 16:56:03 +05'30'