Mrs. Ram Kishori Gupta & Anr. vs Sebi

Securities Appellate Tribunal11 October 2019Tarun Agarwala

CitationReview Application No. 15 of 2019

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

The Tribunal's reasoning in this review order rests on a single principle: an application for review of an earlier order will not lie merely to re-argue a point, where the earlier order has already addressed and rejected the claim for relief sought, with reasons, so that no error apparent on the face of the record is shown; and decisions cited in support of the review are not reasons to revisit the order where they are not applicable to the facts of the case.

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

Judgment

As delivered

BEFORE THE SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNALMUMBAI

Date of Decision : 11.10.2019

Review Application No. 15 of 2019 In Appeal No. 44 of 2019

Mrs. Ram Kishori Gupta, Aged about 69 years, W/o Shri Harish Chandra Gupta

2. Mr. Harish Chandra Gupta Aged about 74 years, S/o Late R.P. Gupta,

Both Resident of 142/38, Ka Amaniganj, Aminabad, Lucknow - 226 018.

At present address for correspondence:

Flat No. 17, Ground Floor, Sujata Niwas, "C" Wing, Opp. Siddharth Hotel, S.V. Road, Bandra (W), Mumbai - 400 050.

..... Appellants

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

Mr. Harish Chandra Gupta, Appellant-in-person. Mr. Mihir Mody, Advocate with Mr. Sushant Yadav, Advocate i/b K. Ashar & Co. for the Respondent.

CORAM : Justice Tarun Agarwala, Presiding Officer Dr. C.K.G. Nair, Member Justice M.T. Joshi, Judicial Member 2

Per : Justice Tarun Agarwala, Presiding Officer (Oral)

1. By our order dated August 2, 2019 we had allowed the

appeal of the appellants in part and directed Securities and

Exchange Board of India ('SEBI' for short) to compensate the

appellants by Rs. 18,25,041/-. The claim towards interest was

however denied by us for the reasons stated in the order itself.

2. The present Review Application has been filed praying

that interest should be awarded. Having heard the appellant-

in-person, we do not find any reason to review our order as

we have specifically held that no interest is payable for the

reasons stated in the said order. The decisions referred in the

Review Application are not applicable to the given facts of

this case.

3. The Review Application accordingly fails and is

dismissed.

Sd/-

Justice Tarun Agarwala Presiding Officer Sd/-

Dr. C.K.G. Nair Member

Sd/-

Justice M.T. Joshi Judicial Member 11.10.2019 Prepared and compared by::msb

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