Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Vijay Ghyanshambhai Pujara vs Sebi

Securities Appellate Tribunal6 January 2025

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

The order is an interim order: it admits the appeal, grants time for pleadings, and adjourns the matter for hearing on a consent date. On the interim prayers, the Tribunal does reason, but only in one respect that bears on the disgorgement direction; the stay of penalty recovery is granted on terms, and the bank attachment point is expressly left for later consideration without any finding. The principle the Tribunal rests its refusal of interim relief against the disgorgement direction on is this: where an appellant has permitted a third party to operate his demat account and is shown to be a repeat offender, he cannot claim equity in resisting liability for disgorgement under Section 11B of the SEBI Act, and an interim stay of the disgorgement direction is therefore refused.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

BEFORE THE SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNALMUMBAI

Date : 06.01.2025

Appeal No. 718 of 2024 [Along with Misc. Application No. 1333 of 2024]

Vijay Ghyanshambhai Pujara ...Appellant Versus

Securities and Exchange Board of India ...Respondent

Mr. Abhiraj Arora, Advocate and Mr. Jitendra Sharda i/b Jitendra Sharda & Associates for the Appellant.

Mr. Sumit Rai a/w Mr. Mihir Mody, Mr. Harshvardhan Melanta, Mr. Yash Sutaria and Mr. Tushar Bansode, Advocates i/b. M/s. K. Ashar & Co. for the Respondent.

ORDER:

Admit.

2. Respondent is granted four weeks time to file a reply and

two weeks thereafter to the appellant to file rejoinder.

3. The recovery proceedings relating to penalty shall remain

stayed subject to deposit of 50% of the penalty amount within

two weeks from today. If the said amount is deposited, the same

shall be kept in an interest bearing account by the respondent.

4. With regard to the direction for disgorgement contained in

paragraph 129.4 of the impugned order, it was argued by 2

learned Advocate for the appellant that the amount of gain made

by the appellant, as recorded in the impugned order (table 19 at

paragraph 122) is 24,200/- only and that the direction for joint

and several liabilities is unsustainable. Adverting to Section 11B

of the SEBI Act, it was submitted that while issuing such

directions SEBI will have to consider actual gain made by the

noticees.

5. Shri Sumit Rai, learned Advocate for the respondent

adverted to paragraph 41.1 of impugned order and submitted

that appellant had permitted one Manoj Somani to operate his

account. The said admission is not denied by the learned

Advocate for the appellant.

6. It was also further submitted by Shri Rai, learned

Advocate for the respondent that the appellant had indulged in

more than one such case and he is a repeat offender and this fact

is also not denied.

7. Thus, in our view, the noticee who is a repeat offender and

who has permitted to use of his demat account by a third party

cannot claim equity with regard to the liability for

disgorgement. Hence, the prayer for interim order against 3

directions disgorgement contained in paragraph at 129.4 of the

impugned order stands rejected.

8. With regard to the other directions contained in paragraph

129, learned Advocate for the appellant submitted that there is

no power under Section 11B of the SEBI Act to attach bank

account. Shri Rai seeks time to file short reply within two weeks

from today. Granted. Liberty is reserved to the appellant to

move the Tribunal for consideration of the interim prayers after

the reply is filed by the respondent.

9. By consent, call on 12.03.2025.

Justice P.S. Dinesh Kumar Presiding Officer

Ms. Meera Swarup Technical Member

Dr. Dheeraj Bhatnagar Technical Member 06.01.2025 MADHUKAR Digitally signed by MADHUKAR BHALBAR

msb BHALBAR Date: 2025.01.10 16:38:00 +05'30'

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