Pannalal Prajapati vs Sebi
- CitationAppeal No. 619 of 2019
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Tribunal's reasoning rests on the principle that an impugned order founded on a show cause notice never served on the party is vitiated for violation of natural justice, and on the consequence that the order cannot stand and the matter must be remitted for a fresh decision after the notice is properly served. Where the respondent concedes it has no proof of delivery of the show cause notice, the appellant's account of non-service is accepted, and the delay in filing the appeal is condoned on that basis.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Date of Decision : 11.02.2020
Misc. Application No. 672 of 2019 And Appeal No. 619 of 2019
Pannalal Prajapati S/o Ukaram Prajapati, Parjapati Ka Vas, Paladar, Dhanera Road, Sanchore, Jalore, Rajasthan - 343041. ......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
Mr. Vikas Bengani, Advocate for the Appellant. Mr. Abhiraj Arora, Advocate with Mr. Vivek Shah, Advocate i/b ELP for the Respondent.
CORAM : Justice Tarun Agarwala, Presiding Officer Dr. C. K. G. Nair, Member Justice M. T. Joshi, Judicial Member
Per : Justice Tarun Agarwala, Presiding Officer (Oral) 2
1.
The present appeal has been filed against the order dated
September 10, 2018. There is a delay of 427 days in filing the appeal
and accordingly, Misc. Application No. 672 of 2019 has been filed
for condoning the delay. The ground urged is that the appellant was
never served with the show cause notice or with the impugned order
and only came to know recently in August 2019.
2. Since the issue relating to the condonation of delay and to the
main appeal is common, both the application and the appeal are
being decided together.
3. A statement has been made by the learned counsel for the
respondent to the effect that they do not have any proof of delivery of
the show cause notice issued upon the appellant. In view of the
statement, we are of the opinion that the delay in filing the appeal is
liable to be condoned. Further, the impugned order which proceeds
from the show cause notice which has not been served upon is
vitiated on the ground of violation of the principles of natural justice.
4. In view of the aforesaid, the delay in filing the appeal is
condoned. Misc. Application is allowed. Further, the impugned
order cannot be sustained and is quashed. The appeal is allowed.
The matter is remitted to the respondent who will decide the matter 3
afresh. The appellant will appear on March 2, 2020 before the
Adjudicating Officer on which date he would be served with the
show cause notice and the Adjudicating Officer will proceed from
there onwards in accordance with law.
Sd/-
Justice Tarun Agarwala Presiding Officer
Sd/-
Dr. C. K. G. Nair Member
Sd/-
Justice M. T. Joshi Judicial Member 11.02.2020 Prepared & Compared by PTM
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