Shri Manoj Tantubai vs Sebi

BEFORE THE SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI Date : 26.10.2017

Appeal No.257 of 2017 Sri Manoj Tantubai, S/o Sri Ananta Tantubai residing at H No.174, Pandra, Village: Pandra, Police Station-Nirsa, District Dhanbad, Jharkhand. ......Appellant

Versus

1.

Securities & Exchange Board of India

2. The Assistant Manager,

3. The Recovery Officer, Mohammad Atif Alvi,

4. The Recovery Officer, Manjesh S Roy, Securities & Exchange Board of India SEBI Bhavan, Plot No. C-4A, G-Block, Bandra-Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai - 400 051.

5. Weird Industries Limited, Bhagyalaxmi Building, Howrah Amta Road, P.O. Dasnagar, Howrah - 700 105.

6. Weird Infrastructure Corporation Limited, Pathak Complex, Pathak Puram Colony, P.O. Amedkar University, Raibareilly, Utter Pradesh - 226 025. ...... Respondents

None for the Appellant.

Mr. Rajesh Nagory, Advocate with Mr. Rohan Agrawal, Advocates i/b. MDP & Partners for the Respondent.

CORAM : Justice J.P. Devadhar, Presiding Officer Dr. C.K.G.Nair, Member

Per : Justice J.P. Devadhar (Oral)

1. None for the appellant.

2. Basic grievance of the appellant in this appeal relates to the two orders

passed by the Whole Time Member ('WTM') of Securities and Exchange Board

of India ('SEBI' for short) on October 21, 2015 and July 24, 2015 respectively,

whereby the WTM had directed Weird Industries Limited and Weird

Infrastructure Corporation Limited and their respective directors to refund the 2

amounts collected by the two companies from the investors within the time

stipulated therein.

3. Grievance of the appellant is that he had made two representations to SEBI

on 6.2.2017 in relation to the aforesaid two companies wherein the appellant had

stated that the investigation carried out by SEBI was faulty as amounts collected

by the two companies were much more than the amounts set out in the Recovery

Certificates issued by the Recovery Officer of SEBI and therefore SEBI must

reinvestigate the matter. Since the said representations have not been considered

by SEBI till date, the appellant has filed the present appeal.

4. Counsel for SEBI on instruction states that the representations made by the

appellant would be disposed of by SEBI within a period of 3 months from today.

The statement made by counsel for SEBI is accepted.

5. It would be open to SEBI to call for further information from the appellant

before considering the representations made by the appellant. However, we

make it clear that even if it is found that the amounts collected by the two

companies were more than the amounts specified in the recovery certificates

issued by the Recovery Officer, it would not invalidate the orders passed by the

Whole Time Member of SEBI, because by the said orders, the two companies

and their respective directors have been jointly and severally directed to refund

all monies collected by the two companies from the investors and not any

specified amount.

6. The Appeal is disposed of on the above terms with no order as to costs.

Sd/-

Justice J. P. Devadhar Presiding Officer

Sd/-

Dr. C.K.G.Nair Member 26.10.2017 Prepared and compared by RHN