Securities Appellate Tribunal
Shri Anandkumar Baldevbhai Patel vs Sebi on 15 March, 2019
Author: Tarun Agarwala
Bench: Tarun Agarwala
BEFORE THE SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
MUMBAI
DATE : 15.03.2019
Misc. Application No. 123 of 2018
And
Appeal No. 164 of 2018
Shri Anandkumar Baldevbhai Patel
01, Shivnagar Society, Bhavpura,
Kadi, Gujarat - 382715. ..... Appellant
Versus
Securities & Exchange Board of India
SEBI Bhavan, Plot No. C-4A, G Block,
Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East),
Mumbai - 400 051. ...... Respondent
Mr. Yogeh Jagia, Advocate with Mr. Chinmay Paradkar, Advocate
for the Appellant.
Mr. Gaurav Joshi, Senior Advocate with Mr. Mihir Mody,
Mr. Sushant Yadav, Advocates i/b K. Ashar & Co. for the
Respondent.
CORAM : Justice Tarun Agarwala, Presiding Officer
Dr. C. K. G. Nair, Member
Per : Justice Tarun Agarwala, Presiding Officer (Oral)
1.The present appeal has been filed against the order dated June 7, 2016 passed by the Whole Time Member (hereinafter referred to as, 'WTM') of Securities and Exchange Board of India (hereinafter referred to as, 'SEBI') under Section 11(4) and 11B of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 (hereinafter referred to as, 2 'SEBI Act') read with Regulation 11 of Securities and Exchange Board of India (Prohibition of Fraudulent and Unfair Trade Practices relating to Securities Market), 2003. The appeal is accompanied with an application for condonation of delay.
2. There is a delay of 651 days in filing the appeal. The ground urged is that an appeal filed by SEBI in a related matter was taken up for hearing before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and, therefore, the present appeal could not be filed within the stipulated period. It was urged that sufficient cause was shown and, therefore, the delay in filing the appeal may be condoned and the appeal be heard on merits.
3. Having perused the application for condonation of delay and after hearing the learned counsel for the parties, we find that there is an inordinate delay of 651 days in filing the present appeal. By no stretch of imagination, it can be said that the appellant was pursuing the matter diligently. The contention that the appellant was pursuing a related matter in the Hon'ble Supreme Court, and therefore, could not file the appeal in our opinion an afterthought and, in case, not a sufficient ground. In fact, the assertion made is vague and that adequate reason has not been given.
4. Under Section 23L of the SEBI Act, an appeal has to be filed within 45 days of the impugned order. If sufficient cause has been 3 shown, the delay in filing the appeal after the stipulated period can be condoned.
5. In Balvant Singh (dead) vs. Jagdish Singh & Ors. [(2010) 8 SCC 685] decided on July 8, 2010, the Hon'ble Supreme Court explained the expression "sufficient cause" to mean the presence of legal and adequate reasons.
6. In the instant case, the impugned order is dated June 7, 2016. The appeal should have been filed within 45 days. The mere fact that an appeal was listed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court cannot be a legal ground for not filing an appeal before the Tribunal. In any case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court was closed for the summer vacations and consequently, there was enough time for the appellant to file an appeal. Even otherwise, the Hon'ble Supreme Court delivered the judgment on September 20, 2017 and the present appeal was filed on May 15, 2018. No explanation has been given as to why the appeal could not be filed soon after the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
7. In the light of the aforesaid, we find that adequate legal reasons have not been provided. The assertion made is patently vague without any evidence to support such statement. No bonafide reasons have been given in condoning the delay. It is the 4 requirement of law that an application for condoning the delay cannot be allowed as a matter of right especially in the absence of adequate and legal reasons.
8. Consequently, Misc. Application No. 123 of 2018 for condonation of delay is misconceived and is rejected, as a result of which the appeal is dismissed.
Sd/-
Justice Tarun Agarwala Presiding Officer Sd/-
Dr. C. K. G. Nair Member 15.03.2019 Prepared & Compared by PTM