Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Seashore Securities Limited vs Sebi

Securities Appellate Tribunal25 November 2016J.P. Devadhar

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

The order quashes the confirmatory order of the Whole Time Member on the ground that the appellants were unable to attend the hearing for unavoidable reasons and are now ready to appear, and directs SEBI to afford a hearing before passing a fresh order; the merits are expressly left undecided, and the interim ex-parte order is preserved pending that hearing.

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: 25.11.2016

Appeal No. 328 of 2015

1.

Seashore Securities Limited B-58, Chandaka Industrial Estate, Patia, Bhubaneswar- 751 024

2. Prashanta Kumar Dash B-58, Chandaka Industrial Estate, Patia, Bhubaneswar- 751 024

3. Pravat Kumar Dash Po- Turanga, District-Anugul Odisha- 759 122

4. Jyotirani Sarangi Po- Kalyani Nagar, District- Cuttack, Odisha

5. Shantiprava Dash Po- Turanga, District- Anugul Odisha- 759 122

6. Manoj Kumar Nath Susuda (Shanti Marg), Po- Ankula, District Anugul, Odisha- 759 122

7. Prativa Dash Po- NTPC, Kaniha, District- Anugul, Odisha- 759 122

8. Sapna Jena Plot No. 739/7A, Bhimpur Airport Field, Near UP School, Bhubaneswar ...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 2

Mr. Nirmay Dave, Advocate with Mr. Abhishek Borgikar and Mr. Satyam Sancheti, Advocates i/b Alliance Corporate Lawyers for Appellants.

Mr. Pradeep Sancheti, Senior Advocate with Ms. Amrita Joshi, Advocate i/b the Law Point 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. This appeal is filed to challenge the confirmatory order passed by

Whole Time Member ("WTM" for short) of the Securities and Exchange

Board of India ("SEBI" for short) on March 18, 2015. It is not in dispute

that inspite of giving three opportunities of hearing the appellants could

not attend the hearing for some reason or other and therefore SEBI was

compelled to pass the confirmatory order without hearing the appellants.

2. Counsel for the appellants state that the appellants could not appear

before the WTM of SEBI due to unavoidable circumstances and that the

appellants are now ready and willing to appear before the WTM of SEBI.

3. In these circumstances, without going into the merits of the case

the confirmatory order dated March 18, 2015 is quashed and set aside.

SEBI is directed to give an opportunity of hearing to the appellants and

thereafter pass appropriate order thereon as expeditiously as possible.

4. It is made clear that the ad- interim ex-parte order passed by the

WTM of SEBI on July 23, 2014 shall continue to be in force.

3 5. Appellants shall disclose the list of assets as sought by SEBI

within four weeks from today.

6. Appeal is disposed of in the aforesaid 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 25.11.2016 Prepared & Compared By: PK

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