Veerhealth Care Ltd. vs Sebi
- CitationAppeal No.314 of 2017
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The appeal is allowed solely by reference to the Tribunal's earlier decision in Gopalakrishnan Raman & Ors vs. SEBI, which the parties agreed covers the present issue; the reasons for that earlier decision are not set out in this order, so no ratio can be extracted from this text itself. The delay of 16 days is condoned on the reasons stated in the miscellaneous application, which are not reproduced here.
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 : 15/11/2017
Misc. Application No.290 of 2017 And Appeal No.314 of 2017
Veerhealth Care Ltd. 629-A, Gazdar House, 1st Floor, Near Kalbadevi Post Office, J.S.S. Marg, Mumbai - 400 002. ... Appellant
Versus
Securities and Exchange Board of India SEBI Bhavan, Plot No.C4-A, G-Block, Bandra-Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai - 400 051. ... Respondent
Mr. Prakash Shah, Advocate for the Appellant.
Mr. Aditya Mehta a/w Mr. Mihit Mody and Mr. Nishant Upadhyay, Advocates i/b K. Ashar & Co. 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)
MISC. APPLICATION NO.290 OF 2017:
1.
There is a delay of 16 days in filing this appeal. For the reasons
stated in the Misc. Application, the delay is condoned. The Misc.
Application is disposed of accordingly. 2
APPEAL NO.314 OF 2017:
2. This appeal is filed to challenge the order passed by the
Adjudicating Officer of Securities and Exchange Board of India ("SEBI"
for short) on 7th August, 2017. By the said order, penalty of Rs.5 lakh is
imposed on the appellant under Section 23 A read with Section 23E of
Securities Contracts (Regulations) Act.
3. Counsel for the parties state that the issue raised in this appeal is
covered by the decision of this Tribunal in favour of the Appellant in
the case of Gopalakrishnan Raman & Ors vs. SEBI (Appeal No.281 of
2014 decided on 20th November, 2015). For the reasons stated in the
aforesaid decision, the impugned order is quashed and set aside.
4. Appeal is allowed 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
15/11/2017 Prepared & compared by-dg
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