Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Mrs. Anupama Motwani And Anr. vs Sebi

Securities Appellate Tribunal17 January 2018J.P. Devadhar

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

The Tribunal condoned a delay of 603 days in filing the appeal on the reasons stated in the condonation application, and disposed of that application accordingly. Where the appellants have appeared before the Recovery Officer on several occasions and that officer has not yet considered their submissions or passed an order on them, an appeal against the recovery proceedings is premature; the appellants should await the Recovery Officer's order on their pleas before pursuing the appeal.

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

Judgment

As delivered

BEFORE THE SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI Date of Decision: 17/01/2018

Misc. Application No.355 of 2017 And Appeal No.389 of 2017

1.

Mrs. Anupama Motwani 39, Mysore Colony, Anik Village, Mahul Road, Chembur, Mumbai - 400 074.

2. Mrs. Rita Motwani 39, Mysore Colony, Anik Village, Mahul Road, Chembur, Mumbai - 400 074. ... Appellants

Versus

Securities and Exchange Board of India SEBI Bhavan, Plot No.C4-A, G-Block, Bandra-Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai - 400 051. ... Respondent

Mr. J.J. Bhatt a/w Ms. Rinku Valanju and Ms. Hiral Shah, Advocates i/b R.V. Legal for Appellants.

Mr. Aditya Mehta a/w Mr. Chirag Bhavsar, Advocates i/b MDP & Partners for the Respondent.

CORAM : Justice J.P. Devadhar, Presiding Officer Jog Singh, Member Dr. C.K.G. Nair, Member

Per : Justice J.P. Devadhar (Oral)

MISC. APPLICATION NO.355 OF 2017:

1. There is delay of 603 days in filing this appeal. For the reasons stated

in the Misc. Application No.355 of 2017 the delay is condoned. The Misc.

Application is disposed of accordingly.

2 APPEAL NO.389 OF 2017:

2. Appellants are aggrieved by the recovery proceedings initiated by the

Recovery Officer ("RO" for short) of Securities and Exchange Board of India

("SEBI" for short) on 21st March, 2016. Admittedly, appellants have appeared

before the RO of SEBI on several occasions and the RO is yet to consider the

plea of the appellants and pass appropriate order. In these circumstances,

proper course for the appellants is to wait till the RO passes appropriate order

on their submissions and not to pursue the present appeal.

3. Appeal is disposed of in the above terms with no order as to costs.

Sd/-

Justice J.P. Devadhar Presiding Officer

Sd/-

Jog Singh Member

Sd/-

Dr. C.K.G. Nair Member 17/01/2018 prepared & compared by-dg

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