Customize Consent Preferences

We use cookies to help you navigate efficiently and perform certain functions. You will find detailed information about all cookies under each consent category below.

The cookies that are categorized as "Necessary" are stored on your browser as they are essential for enabling the basic functionalities of the site. ... 

Always Active

Necessary cookies are required to enable the basic features of this site, such as providing secure log-in or adjusting your consent preferences. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable data.

No cookies to display.

Functional cookies help perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collecting feedback, and other third-party features.

No cookies to display.

Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics such as the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.

No cookies to display.

Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.

No cookies to display.

Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with customized advertisements based on the pages you visited previously and to analyze the effectiveness of the ad campaigns.

No cookies to display.

Mrs. Sonal Patel vs sebi appeal no.167 of 2013 sat order dated 18 december 2013

BEFORE THE SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
MUMBAI

Date of Decision : 18.12.2013

Appeal No. 166 of 2013

  1. Mr. Anurag Agarwal
  2. Paksh Developers Pvt. Ltd.
    Through its authorized Director
    Mr. Anurag Agarwal.

Both having Office at:
302, Pushpak Commercial Complex,
Prahladnagar, Vijalpur,
Anandnagar, Ahmedabad 380 051, Gujarat.

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. P.N. Modi, Senior Advocate with Mr. Neville Lashkari, Advocate for
Appellants.

Mr. Chirag Balsara, Advocate with Mr. Pratham Masurekar, Advocate for
Respondent.

WITH

Appeal No. 161 of 2013
Shri A bhishek Soni
Resi. at: 121, Sardar Patel Colony,
Near Sardar Statue, Naranpura,
Ahmedabad

Versus

Securities and Exchange Board of India

SEBI Bhavan, Plot No. C – 4A, G Block,

Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East),

Mumbai – 400 051.

2

WITH

Appeal No. 162 of 2013

Shri Harshad Panchal
Resi. at: C-4, Kavita Society,
Nr. Vakhariya Nagar, Kalol,
382 721 Gandhinagar, Gujarat.

WITH

Appeal No. 163 of 2013

Radhe Krishna Broking
A partnership firm through partner:
Mr. Hemang S Shah
Resi. at: A/1/4, Prasiddha Apartment,
Satellite, Ahmedabad

WITH

3

Appeal No. 164 of 2013

Mr. Hemang S Shah
Resi. at: A/1/4, Prasiddha Apartment,
Satellite, Ahmedabad –

…App
WITH

Appeal No. 165 of 2013

Mr. Umesh Patel
Resti. at: B/87, C P Nagar,
Part –

…App

4

WITH

Appeal No. 167 of 2013

Mrs. Sonal Patel
Resti. at: B/87, C P Nagar,
Part –

…App

WITH

Appeal No. 168 of 2013

Shri Dhaval Soni
Resi. at: 121, Sardar Patel Colony,
Near Sardar Statue, Naranpura,
Ahmedabad

CORAM : Justice J.P. Devadhar, Presiding Officer
Jog Singh, Member
A.S. Lamba, Member

Per : J.P. Devadhar (Oral)

5

  1. In all these appeals appellants have challenged two ex parte

adjudication orders both dated June 5, 2013.

  1. Grievance of appellants is that advocate who was to appear for

appellants could not appear before Adjudicating Officer on specified day as

his wife was hospitalized and accordingly adjournment was sought, but

rejecting application for adjournment impugned ex parte order has been

passed on the ground that no evidence has been produced.

  1. In view of evidence to the above effect produced before us, counsel

for respondent on instruction agrees for setting aside the ex parte order with

liberty to pass fresh order on merits.

  1. Accordingly, by consent impugned orders both dated June 5, 2013

are set aside and all matters are restored to the file of Adjudicating Officer

for passing fresh order on merits and in accordance with law.

  1. Learned counsel for respondent states that inspection of documents

set out in appellant’s advocate letter dated April 4, 2013 at Page No. 161

(Appeal No. 166 of 2013) would be given within a period of 4 weeks from

today.

  1. Learned counsel for appellants state that appellants would file

additional documents before Adjudicating Officer, if any, within a period of

one week from the date of respondent giving inspection of documents and

co-operate in adjudication proceedings inter-alia by not seeking any

adjournment.

6

  1. Above statement of learned counsel for appellants and respondent is

accepted.

  1. Adjudicating Officer is directed to pass fresh order on merits as

expeditiously as possible after affording an opportunity of hearing to the

appellants.

  1. All appeals are disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs. Sd/- Justice J.P. Devadhar Presiding Officer Sd/-
    Jog Singh
    Member Sd/- A.S. Lamba Member
    18.12.2013
    Prepared and compared by:
    msb