Securities Appellate Tribunal
Price Waterhouse, Bangalore vs Sebi on 21 June, 2017
BEFORE THE SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
MUMBAI
Date of Decision : 21.06.2017
Appeal No. 138 of 2017
Price Waterhouse Bangalore
5th Floor, Tower D, The Millennia,
1 & 2 Murphy Road, Ulsoor,
Bangalore - 560008. ...Appellant
Versus
Securities and Exchange Board of India,
SEBI Bhavan, Plot No. C-4A, G-Block,
Bandra-Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), ...Respondent
Mumbai - 400 051.
WITH
Appeal No. 139 of 2017
Price Waterhouse, Bangalore
Price Waterhouse Bangalore
5th Floor, Tower D, The Millennia,
1 & 2 Murphy Road, Ulsoor,
Bangalore - 560008. ...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
WITH
Appeal No. 140 of 2017
Price Waterhouse, Bangalore
Price Waterhouse Bangalore
5th Floor, Tower D, The Millennia,
1 & 2 Murphy Road, Ulsoor, ...Appellant
Bangalore - 560008.
Versus
Securities and Exchange Board of India,
SEBI Bhavan, Plot No. C-4A, G-Block,
Bandra-Kurla Complex, Bandra (East),
Mumbai - 400 051. ...Respondent
2
WITH
Appeal No. 141 of 2017
Price Waterhouse, Bangalore
Price Waterhouse Bangalore
5th Floor, Tower D, The Millennia,
1 & 2 Murphy Road, Ulsoor,
Bangalore - 560008. ...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. Janak Dwarkadas, Senior Advocate with Mr. Shyam Mehta, Senior
Advocate, Mr. Somasekhar Sundaresan, Mr. Zerick Dastur, Ms. Prerna
Arora, Ms. Archana Uppuluri, Mr. Kunal Kothary, Mr. Abishek V. and
Mr. Dhaval K., Advocate i/b Zerick Dastur Advocate & Solicitors for the
Appellant.
Mr. Fredun DeVitre, Senior Advocate with Mr. Mihir Mody, Mr. Nishant
Upadhyay and Mr. Nirav Parmar, Advocates i/b K. Ashar & Co. for the
Respondent.
CORAM : Jog Singh, Member
Dr. C.K.G. Nair, Member
Per : Jog Singh, Member (Oral)
1.In this bunch of four appeals, the Appellants have challenged the orders dated May 31, 2017, May 19, 2017, June 5, 2017 and June 15, 2017 respectively passed by Securities and Exchange Board of India ('SEBI' for short).
2. With the consent of the parties, these appeals are taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself and are being heard and disposed of by the present order.
3*3. The primary grievance raised by the Appellant is that the Ld. Whole Time Member ('WTM' for short) has abruptly closed the cross-examination of some witnesses, namely, CH Ravindranath, Siva Prasad Pulavarthi, Srinivas Talluri, Subramani Gopalakrishna, Mr. VVK Raju, Mr. Prekki Srinivasa Sudhakar and Ms. Madduri Naga Venkata Gayatri, causing prejudice to the Appellant's defence. It is argued by Shri Janak Dwarkadas, Learned Senior Counsel for the Appellant that full cross-examination of these witnesses is crucial from the point of view of the Appellant. It is against the principles of natural justice that the ongoing cross-examination of a witness is curtailed in the manner in which it has been sought to be done in the present case. Shri Fredun DeVitre, Learned Senior Counsel for SEBI has contended that sufficient opportunity of cross-examination has already been afforded to the Appellant to enable it to conduct an effective cross-examination of the witnesses being relied upon by SEBI.
4. We have heard both the Learned Senior Counsel for the parties for quite some time. We note that cross-examination of a witness is a valuable right and any abrupt time limit on cross-examination would lead to curtailment of a valuable right. The amount of cross-examination would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case depending upon the complexities of issues involved therein. However, it may not be out of place to note that a blanket right of cross-examination cannot be claimed by party irrespective of the peculiarity of the facts and issues of a case. Indiscriminate cross-examination of a witness by posing him patently irrelevant and inadmissible questions cannot be allowed by the WTM in a given case if it found that the cross-examination is going in a rambling way. In such an eventuality the authority will be entitled to record the reasons for closure of the cross-examination if it is convinced that sufficient opportunity of cross-examination has been given to a party in a particular case. 4 *5. Be that as it may, Shri DeVitre, Learned Senior Counsel for SEBI, on instruction, has fairly stated that further cross-examination of these witnesses, namely, (1) CH Ravindranath, (2) Siva Prasad Pulavarthi (3) Srinivas Talluri, (4) Subramani Gopalakrishna (5) Mr. VVK Raju (6) Mr. Prekki Srinivasa Sudhakar and (7) Ms. Madduri Naga Venkata Gayatri shall be afforded to the Appellant as soon as these witnesses become available for the said purpose, provided the Appellant cross-examines these witnesses on the same day as and when they are produced by SEBI for the purpose of remaining cross-examination, if any.
6. In the circumstances, we set aside the 4 impugned orders dated May 31, 2017, May 19, 2017, June 5, 2017 and June 15, 2017 and allow these appeals by directing the Appellant to cross-examine the above said witnesses preferably on the same day when they are produced for the purpose of cross-examination and SEBI shall make an endeavour to produce these witnesses for cross-examination as expeditiously as possible as it is an old matter.
7. With the aforesaid directions, these four appeals stand allowed with no order as to costs.
Sd/-
Jog Singh Member Sd/-
Dr. C.K.G. Nair Member 21.06.2017 Prepared and compared by:
msb * Amended pursuant to Order dated 23rd June, 2017.5
"1. Not on board. Mentioned by the Counsel for the parties by praecipes.
2. By these two praecipes preferred by the appellant as well as the Respondent, it is brought to the notice of the Tribunal that in paragraph 3 of Order dated 21st June, 2017, inadvertently it has been recorded that cross- examination in respect of 7 witnesses was abruptly curtailed. In fact, Shri CH Ravindranath, Siva Prasad Pulavarthi, Srinivas Talluri, and Subramani Gopalakrishna were refused to be produced by SEBI at the first instance. During the course of hearing in Appeal No.138 of 2017, Shri DeVitre, Learned Senior Counsel for SEBI, on instruction, stated that they have no objection to produce Shri CH Ravindranath and Shri Siva Prasad Pulavarthi for cross-examination as and when they become available. Whereas the statements of Srinivas Talluri and Subramani Gopalakrishna earlier recorded would not be relied upon against the appellant or 10 other PW entities who are also the noticees and hence, these persons will not be produced for cross-examination. Mr. DeVitre, learned Senior Counsel for SEBI has no objection to this concession. As far as 3 other witnesses Mr. VVK Raju, Mr. Prekki Srinivasa Sudhakar and Ms. Madduri Naga Venkata Gayatri are concerned, these witnesses will be produced by SEBI for further cross- examination in terms of para 5 & 6 of our order dated 21st June,2017. It may be recorded for the sake of clarification that these last 3 witnesses namely, Mr. VVK Raju, Mr. Prekki Srinivasa Sudhakar and Ms. Madduri Naga Venkata Gayatri are the subject matter of Appeal Nos. 139, 140 and 141 of 2017, respectively.
2. Paragraphs 3 and 5 of our Order dated 21st June, 2017 accordingly stand modified. Registry is directed to incorporate this order at the end of the Order dated 21st June, 2017 and reissue the same order along with this amendment to the parties today itself.6
3. Praecipes are disposed of accordingly."
Sd/-
Jog Singh Member Sd/-
Dr. C.K.G. Nair Member 23.06.2017 Prepared & compared by-dg