Securities Appellate Tribunal
Citrus Check Inns Limited vs Sebi on 6 August, 2015
Author: J.P. Devadhar
Bench: J.P. Devadhar
BEFORE THE SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
MUMBAI
Date of Decision : 06.08.2015
Appeal No. 336of 2015
Citrus Check Inns Limited
16-19, 1st Floor, Shilpin Center,
4, G.D. Ambekar Marg, Wadala, ...Appellant
Mumbai - 400 031.
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. Pradeep Sancheti, Senior Advocate with Mr. Sagar Ghogre, Senior
Advocate, Mr. C.D. Mehta, Ms. Rashida Savliwala and Mr. Krushanu
Pandya i/b Dhruve Liladhar & Co. for the Appellant.
Mr. Vikram Nankani, Senior Advocate with Mr. Tomu Francis and
Mr. Prithviraj Choudhari, Advocates i/b Economic Laws Practice for the
Respondent.
WITH
Appeal No. 359 of 2015
1.Mr. Omprakash Basantlal Goenka
2. Mr. Prakash Ganpat Utekar
3. Mr. Venkatraman Natrajan
4. Mr. Narayan Shivram Kotnis 16-19, 1st Floor, Shilpin Center, 4, G.D. Ambekar Marg, Wadala, Mumbai - 400 031. ...Appellants 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. C.D. Mehta, Advocate with Ms. Rashida Savliwala and Mr. Krushanu Pandya i/b Dhruve Liladhar & Co. for Appellants. Mr. Vikram Nankani, Senior Advocate with Mr. Tomu Francis and Mr. Prithviraj Choudhari, Advocates i/b Economic Laws Practice for the Respondent.
2CORAM : Justice J.P. Devadhar, Presiding Officer Jog Singh, Member Per : J.P. Devadhar (Oral)
1. Since the issue involved in these appeals being common, both these appeals are heard together and disposed of by this common order.
2. Appellants are aggrieved by the ex parte ad interim order passed by the Whole Time Member (WTM) of Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) on June 3, 2015. By the said order appellants and its other directors are, inter alia, restrained from collecting any fresh money from its members under the existing schemes and are further directed not to launch any new schemes or plans.
3. Grievance of the appellants is that the above ex parte ad interim order passed without hearing the appellants inspite of furnishing the requisite information is causing serious prejudice to the appellants and to its 4.5 lakh (approx.) members. It is contended that the business carried on by the appellants does not fall within the category of Collective Investment Scheme (CIS) defined under Section 11AA of SEBI Act, 1992 and the prima facie view of SEBI is wholly unsustainable in view of various decisions of this Tribunal. Counsel for SEBI disputes the above contentions.
4. Before these appeals could be taken up for hearing, the WTM of SEBI has offered to hear the appellants on August 10, 2015. In this view of the matter, without going into the merits of the case we direct the appellants to file their reply, if any, on or before August 10, 2015 and the WTM of SEBI is directed to hear the appellants on or before August 13, 2015 and thereafter pass appropriate order thereon and communicate the same to the 3 appellants on or before August 24, 2015. It is made clear that the hearing shall be restricted to the question as to whether the prima facie view contained in the ex parte ad interim order dated June 3, 2015 on the grounds set out therein can be sustained after hearing the appellants or not.
5. It is made clear that if the WTM of SEBI fails to hear the appellants on or before August 13, 2015 and fails to pass and communicate the final order on or before August 24, 2015, the ex parte ad interim order dated June 3, 2015 shall forthwith come to an end.
6. Both appeals are disposed of in the above terms with no order as to costs.
Sd/-
Justice J.P. Devadhar Presiding Officer Sd/-
Jog Singh Member 06.08.2015 Prepared and compared by:
msb