Miss Lucy
← All judgments

White Water Management Services Pvt. ... vs Sebi

Securities Appellate Tribunal26 April 2018J. P. Devadhar

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

A finding that a person has aided or abetted another's violation of the SEBI Act and the PFUTP Regulations cannot stand where the principal violator has been held guilty but no role in that violation has been attributed to the person alleged to have aided and abetted it; such a finding is set aside to that extent.

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

Judgment

As delivered

BEFORE THE SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI DATE : 26.04.2018

Appeal No. 119 of 2018

Ms. Viral Doshi 601, Sukh Castle, Bhandarkar Road, Matunga, Mumbai 400 019. ..... 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. Gaurav Joshi, Senior Advocate with Mr. Ankit Lohia, Mr. Varun Nathani, Ms. Akshaya Bhansali, Advocates i/b Mindspright Legal for the Appellant. Mr. Pradeep Sancheti, Senior Advocate with Mr. Tomu Francis, Mr. Vivek Shah, Advocates for the Respondent.

With Appeal No. 121 of 2018

Veena N. Kotecha 601, Sukh Castle, Bhandarkar Road, Matunga (CR), Mumbai 400 019. ..... 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 Bhachawat, Advocate with Ms. Akshaya Bhansali, Advocate i/b Mindspright Legal for the Appellant. Mr. Pradeep Sancheti, Senior Advocate with Mr. Tomu Francis, Mr. Vivek Shah, Advocates for the Respondent.

With Appeal No. 122 of 2018

Manilal D. Kotecha 601, Sukh Castle, Bhandarkar Road, Matunga (CR), Mumbai 400 019. ..... Appellant 2

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. Chetan Shah, Advocate with Ms. Akshaya Bhansali, Advocate i/b Mindspright Legal for the Appellant. Mr. Pradeep Sancheti, Senior Advocate with Mr. Tomu Francis, Mr. Vivek Shah, Advocates for the Respondent.

With Appeal No. 123 of 2018

Teakwood Management Services Pvt. Ltd. (formerly known as Nirman Management Services Pvt. Ltd.) 601, Plot No. 371, Sukh Castle, Opp. HDFC Bank, Bhandarkar Road, Matunga, Mumbai 400 019. ..... 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

Ms. Rishika Harish, Advocate with Ms. Akshaya Bhansali, Advocate i/b Mindspright Legal for the Appellant. Mr. Pradeep Sancheti, Senior Advocate with Mr. Tomu Francis, Mr. Vivek Shah, Advocates for the Respondent.

With Appeal No. 124 of 2018

White Water Management Services Pvt. Ltd. (formerly known as Nishwet Management Services Pvt. Ltd.) 601, Plot No. 371, Sukh Castle, Opp. HDFC Bank, Bhandarkar Road, Matunga, Mumbai 400 019. ..... 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 3

Mr. Ankit Lohia, Advocate with Ms. Akshaya Bhansali, Advocate i/b Mindspright Legal for the Appellant. Mr. Pradeep Sancheti, Senior Advocate with Mr. Tomu Francis, Mr. Vivek Shah, Advocates for the Respondent.

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

Per : Justice J. P. Devadhar (Oral)

1.

Appellants in all these appeals are aggrieved by the orders passed by

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

Board of India ('SEBI' for short) wherein each appellant is held guilty of

aiding and abetting Mr. Nirmal Kotecha in violating the SEBI Act, and

Securities and Exchange Board of India (Prohibition of Fraudulent and

Unfair Trade Practices relating to Securities Market) Regulations, 2003

('PFUTP Regulations' for short).

2. It is not in dispute that by an order dated March 22, 2018 the WTM

of SEBI has held that Nirmal Kotecha is guilty of violating SEBI Act and

regulations framed thereunder, but none of the appellants are held to have

any role in that violation. In these circumstances, findings recorded in the

respective orders that each appellant had aided and abetted Nirmal Kotecha

in violating the SEBI Act and PFUTP Regulations cannot be sustained and

are set aside to that extent.

3. All the appeals are disposed of in the aforesaid terms with no order

as to costs.

Sd/-

Justice J. P. Devadhar Presiding Officer

Sd/-

Dr. C. K. G. Nair Member 26.04.2018 Prepared & Compared by PTM

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