Delhi High Court - Orders
Ravinder Kumar Nagpal vs Amrapali Aadya Trading And Investment ... on 25 September, 2023
Author: Manoj Kumar Ohri
Bench: Manoj Kumar Ohri
$~4
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ ARB.P. 877/2023 and I.A. 16291/2023
RAVINDER KUMAR NAGPAL ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Kamal Mehta and Mr. Abhishek
Chauhan, Advocates
versus
AMRAPALI AADYA TRADING AND INVESTMENT PRIVATE
LIMITED & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Ms. Rachitta Rai, Advocate for
respondent No.3
Mr. Ashish Aggarwal, Mr. Satyajit Yadav and Mr.
Nischay Kapoor, Advocates for respondent No.4
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI
ORDER
% 25.09.2023
1. By way of present petition filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter, referred to as the 'A&C Act'), the petitioner seeks appointment of Arbitral Tribunal comprising of a sole arbitrator, to adjudicate the disputes that have arisen between the parties.
2. The petitioner claims to be a constituent member of respondent No.1 through which he undertook trades on the stock exchanges. The trading license of respondent No.1 was suspended by SEBI on 10.08.2017. The petitioner filed a claim of Rs.1,18,42,487/- with the Investor's Grievance Cell under NSE Bye-laws. It is further claimed that in the proceedings, though the Investor's Grievance Cell allowed a claim of Rs.1,09,45,676/-
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/09/2023 at 22:58:00 however, only a sum of Rs.25,00,000/- was released the same being the maximum permissible amount payable out of the Investors Protection Fund. Although the petitioner invoked arbitration, the same was disputed by respondent No.4/SEBI.
3. During the course of submissions, learned counsel for SEBI has submitted that insofar as the petitioner's claim against the denial of entire claim amount of Rs.1,18,42,487/- is concerned, the order passed by the Investor's Grievance Cell is appealable under Section 23L of SCRA.
4. Learned counsel for NSE submits that assets of respondent No.1 have been taken over and Chapter XII of the Byelaws provides for the mechanism for application of those assets. He submits that as the answering respondent is still receiving claims from various investors, the process would be initiated in due time and the remaining claim of Rs.84,45,676/- would be considered, subject to the claims of other claims investors as well as the availability of the assets in terms of Clause 23 under Chapter XII of the Byelaws.
5. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks leave to withdraw the present petition with liberty to take steps in accordance with law.
6. Leave and liberty, as prayed for, are granted. The present petition is dismissed as withdrawn alongwith the pending application.
MANOJ KUMAR OHRI, J SEPTEMBER 25, 2023 na This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/09/2023 at 22:58:00