White Water Management Services Pvt. ... vs Sebi
- CitationAppeal No. 119 of 2018
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