Ravi P. Khatri vs Sebi

BEFORE THE SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI Date of Decision: 1.8.2022 Appeal No.429 of 2022 Ravi P. Khatri E-379, Samadariya City, Madhav Nagar, Katni 483504 State of Madhya Pradesh ... Appellant Versus 1. One Mobikwik Systems Ltd. HUDA City Centre, 5th Floor, Metro Station, Sector 29, Grugam, State of Haryana 122001. 2. Ms. Upasana RupkrishanTaku HUDA City Centre, 5th Floor, Metro Station, Sector 29, Grugam, State of Haryana 122001. 3. Ms. Deepshika Lohmorh The Assistant General Manager North Zone, Northern Regional Office, Securities and Exchange Board of India [ New Delhi. ...Respondents Ms. Varsha Palav, Advocate with Mr. Karan Bharadwaj, Mr. Ajinkya Palav and Mr. Anuj Tiwari, Advocates i/b. The Laureate for the Appellant. 2 Mr. Sumit Roy, Advocate i/b. Claritas Legal for the Respondent Nos.1 and 2. Mr. Sumit Rai, Advocate with Mr. Mihir Mody, Mr. Arnav Misra and Mr. Mayur Jaisingh, Advocates i/b. K Ashar & Co. for the Respondent No.3. CORAM: Justice Tarun Agarwala, Presiding Officer Justice M.T. Joshi, Judicial Member Ms. Meera Swarup, Technical Member Per: Justice Tarun Agarwala, Presiding Officer (Oral) 1. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

The present appeal has been filed against the disposal of the complaint filed by the appellant on the SCORES platform. 2. We find that a complaint was filed by the appellant against M/s. One Mobikwik Systems Ltd. for failure to make necessary mandatory disclosures as per the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992, Securities and Exchange Board of India (Issue of Capital and Disclosure Requirements) Regulations, 2018 (hereinafter referred to as the ICDR Regulations) and as well as the Companies Act. It was alleged that 3 the Company had failed to make the disclosures regarding two pending litigations. 3. In this regard, SEBI called for information from the Lead Manager as well as from the Company. 4. It transpires that the Company in compliance with the requirements of the ICDR Regulations had framed a materiality policy for identification of material litigation, pursuant to which it was found that the two litigations pending against the Company were not material for disclosure in the offer document. This fact was examined and found to be satisfactory by SEBI and, accordingly, the complaint was disposed of.

5. We find that the disposal was made in accordance with provisions and all factors have been taken into consideration. We consequently do not find any manifest error requiring any interference. The appeal fails and is dismissed. 6. This order will be digitally signed by the Private Secretary on behalf of the bench and all concerned 4 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 Justice M.T. Joshi Judicial Member Ms. Meera Swarup Technical Member RAJALA Digitally by signed 1.8.2022 KSHMI RAJALAKSHMI NAIR H Date: 2022.08.05 H NAIR 16:03:33 +05'30' RHN