Securities Appellate Tribunal
Rohini Vijaysingh Patwardhan vs Sebi on 25 May, 2016
Author: J. P. Devadhar
Bench: J. P. Devadhar
BEFORE THE SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
MUMBAI
Date: 25.05.2016
Misc. Application No. 85 of 2016
In
Appeal No. 449 of 2015
Securities and Exchange Board of India
SEBI Bhavan, Plot No. C-4A, G Block,
Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), .... Applicant
Mumbai - 400 051. (Org. Respondent)
Versus
Rohini Vijaysingh Patwardhan
Sangli Villa, 4 Dakshina Murti Soc.,
10th Road, JVPD Scheme,
Opp. Saurashtra Bus Stop,
Juhu Vileparle (West), ...Respondent
Mumbai 400 049. (Org. Appellant)
Mr. Saurabh Bachhawat, Advocate i/b K Ashar & Co. for the
Applicant.
Mr. Ravi Ramaiya, Chartered Accountant 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)
1.By this miscellaneous application Securities and Exchange Board of India ('SEBI' for short) seeks extension of six weeks time to pass an order on the objections raised by the appellant against the ex-parte ad- interim order dated April 17, 2015.
2. Appeal No. 449 of 2015 was filed by the appellant to challenge the ex-parte ad-interim order dated April 17, 2015 whereby, pending further investigation, 129 entities including the appellant were 2 restrained from entering the securities market. In the said order, it was recorded that objections, if any, to the ex-parte ad-interim order be filed within 21 days from the date of the ex-parte order and whether any personal hearing is needed.
3. Accordingly, appellant filed her objections to the ex-parte ad- interim order and thereafter personal hearing was given to the appellant by the Whole Time Member ('WTM' for short) of SEBI on August 13, 2015.
4. As no order was passed even after giving personal hearing, appellant filed Appeal No. 449 of 2015 to challenge the ex-parte order dated April 17, 2015. When the said appeal came up for hearing, counsel for SEBI submitted that appropriate order would be passed within a period of eight weeks from that day. Accordingly, the appeal was disposed of on October 30, 2015 by directing the WTM of SEBI to pass appropriate order within eight weeks from October 30, 2015.
5. As the WTM of SEBI failed to pass an order within the stipulated time, the appellant took out miscellaneous application no. 58 of 2016 which was disposed of by an order dated April 27, 2016 thereby granting as a last chance three weeks time to pass and order.
6. Having failed to pass an order within the extended period, SEBI has filed the present miscellaneous application seeking further extension of six weeks time to pass an order.
7. Although the request made by the WTM of SEBI is wholly unjustified, in view of the fact that on May 16, 2016 the WTM of SEBI has defreezed some of the freezed assets belonging to the appellant, 3 reluctantly we grant six weeks time to the WTM of SEBI to pass an order qua the appellant. It is made clear that if the WTM of SEBI fails to pass an order within a period of six weeks from today, then the ex- parte ad-interim order passed on April 17, 2015 shall come to an end qua the appellant without reference to this Tribunal.
8. Counsel for SEBI on instruction states that the application made by the appellant on May 17, 2016 shall be disposed of within two weeks from today. Statement of the counsel for SEBI is accepted.
9. Miscellaneous application is disposed of 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 25.05.2016 Prepared & Compared by PTM