Rekha Bhandari vs Sebi
- CitationAppeal No. 117 of 2017
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Tribunal reasons that a claimed ailment is not, without more, a reasonable explanation for an 833-day or 753-day delay in filing an appeal where the appellants do not show how the illness prevented them from taking steps to file the appeal through another person, so the explanation does not justify condonation of such delay. Consequentially, an application for condonation of delay that is dismissed renders the appeal and the connected interim-relief applications infructuous, and they are disposed of accordingly without costs.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Date of Decision : 12.01.2018
Misc. Application No. 152 of 2017 And Misc. Application No. 153 of 2017 And Appeal No. 117 of 2017
Rekha Bhandari B-301, Wembley Estate, Opp. Rose Wood City, Sector 49-50, Gurgaon, Haryana - 122001. ...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
WITH Misc. Application No. 154 of 2017 And Misc. Application No. 155 of 2017 And Appeal No. 118 of 2017
Rekha Bhandari B-301, Wembley Estate, Opp. Rose Wood City, Sector 49-50, Gurgaon, Haryana - 122001. ...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 2
WITH Misc. Application No. 156 of 2017 And Misc. Application No. 157 of 2017 And Appeal No. 119 of 2017
Sunil Bhandari B-301, Wembley Estate, Opp. Rose Wood City, Sector 49-50, Gurgaon, Haryana - 122001. ...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. Saurabh Bachhawat, Advocate i/b Dr. S.K. Jain, PCS for the Appellant.
Mr. S.P. Bharti, Advocate with Mr. Tomu Francis and Mr. Vivek Shah, Advocates 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)
1.
Appeal No. 117 of 2017 is filed to challenge the order passed by the
Adjudicating Officer (AO) of Securities and Exchange Board of India
('SEBI' for short) on November 28, 2014 along with Misc. Application No.
152 of 2017 seeking condonation of 833 days delay in filing the appeal.
Appeal Nos. 118 of 2017 & 119 of 2017 are filed to challenge the order
passed by the AO of SEBI on February 16, 2015 with Misc. Application
Nos. 154 of 2017 & 156 of 2017 seeking condonation of 753 days delay in
filing the above two appeals. Misc. Application Nos. 153 of 2017, 155 of
2017 and 157 of 2017 are filed in the respective appeals seeking interim
reliefs as more particularly set out therein. 3
2. Grounds set out in all the three Misc. Applications seeking
condonation of 833 days delay and 753 days delay are identical. Common
ground set out in all the three Misc. Applications is that the delay of 833
days and 753 days in filing the respective appeals occurred due to
unavoidable reasons as the appellants and their family members had
continuously suffered ailments for 833 days / 753 days due to which the
appellants could not contact any competent person to file appeals.
3. We find it difficult to believe that the ailments allegedly suffered by
the appellants and their family members were such that they could not take
steps to file appeals for 833 days / 753 days. In our opinion, explanation
given by the appellants does not constitute reasonable explanation for
condoning the delay of 833 days / 753 days. Accordingly, all the three Misc.
Applications bearing Nos. 152 of 2017, 154 of 2017 and 156 of 2017 are
dismissed.
4. In view of the dismissal of the above three Misc. Applications all the
three appeals bearing Nos. 117 of 2017, 118 of 2017 and 119 of 2017 and
the three Misc. Applications bearing Nos. 153 of 2017, 155 of 2017 and 157
of 2017 seeking interim relief become infructuous.
5. Accordingly, all the appeals and all the Misc. Applications are
disposed of with no order as to costs.
Sd/-
Justice J.P. Devadhar Presiding Officer
Sd/-
Jog Singh Member
Sd/-
Dr. C.K.G. Nair Member 12.01.2018 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