Mr. Rohit Mansukhani vs Sebi

Date of Decision : 10.01.2023

Misc. Application No. 1733 of 2022 And Misc. Application No. 1734 of 2022 And Misc. Application No. 1735 of 2022 And Appeal No. 24 of 2023 Mr. Rohit Mansukhani B-37, Gulmohur CHSL, Juhu Cross Lane, Andheri-West, Mumbai - 400058. ..... 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. Sumit Rai, Advocate with Mr. Mihir Mody, Mr. Arnav Misra, Mr. Mayur Jaisingh, Advocates i/b. K Ashar & Co. for the Respondent.

CORAM : Justice Tarun Agarwala, Presiding Officer Ms. Meera Swarup, Technical Member

Per : Justice Tarun Agarwala, Presiding Officer (Oral) 2

1.

The appellant has challenged the order dated October 31, 2022

passed by the Adjudicating Officer (hereinafter referred to as 'AO')

of Securities and Exchange Board of India (hereinafter referred to as

'SEBI') against The Bombay Dyeing & Manufacturing Co. Ltd.

(hereinafter referred to as 'Bombay Dyeing'). The appellant was

neither a party to the proceedings nor the order is against him.

2. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the appellant

that the proceedings were imitated against the Bombay Dyeing only

upon the complaint filed by him and, therefore, he is an aggrieved

person, since the order passed by the authority has not been properly

passed.

3. Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant, we find that

only an aggrieved person can file an appeal against the order of SEBI

under Section 15T of the Securities and Exchange Board of India

Act, 1992. The impugned order does not affect the appellant, in any

way, nor anything has been shown as to how the appellant is

aggrieved by any finding of the AO in the impugned order. No

material or evidence has been produced which would necessitate the

appellant to file an appeal. Further, the appellant has not impleaded

Bombay Dyeing as a respondent in the present appeal. 3

4. We are of the opinion that the appellant is not a person

aggrieved and is neither a proper or necessary party. The mere fact

that he has filed a complaint does not entitle him to file an appeal.

5. The appeal is not maintainable and is dismissed as such.

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

Ms. Meera Swarup Technical Member 10.01.2023 PRAMILA Digitally signed by PRAMILA TANAJI

PTM TANAJI MISAL Date: 2023.01.10 MISAL 17:59:17 +05'30'