BEFORE THE SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
MUMBAI

                         Appeal No. 132 of 2012  
   Alongwith  
                                        Misc. Application No. 77 of 2012  

                              Date of decision: 26.6.2012                           

Ms. Alka Thakkar
305-B, Vicky Apartments,
P. Baloo Marg, Prabhadevi,
Mumbai – 400025.

……Appell

Versus

1. Securities and Exchange Board of India
   SEBI Bhavan, Plot No. C-4A, G Block,
   Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East),
   Mumbai – 400 051.
2. National Securities Depository Limited
   Trade World, A Wing, 4th & 5th Floors,
   Kamala Mills Compound, Lower Parel,
   Mumbai 400 013. s

Mr. Ankit Lohia, Advocate with Ms. Akshaya Bhansali, Ms. Pragati Shetty,

Advocates for the Appellant.

Mr. Kumar Desai, Advocate with Mr. Mihir Mody, Mr. Akhilesh Singh,

Advocates for Respondents.

CORAM : P. K. Malhotra, Member & Presiding Officer ( O f f g .)
S. S. N. Moorthy, Member

Per : P. K. Malhotra (Oral)

This appeal has been filed against the order dated January 28, 2010 passed by

the whole time member of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (for short the

Board) confirming the ex-parte ad-interim order dated April 23, 2009 in the matter of

Pyramid Saimira Theatre Limited (the company). The ex-parte order was passed by

the Board restraining the appellant, her husband Deepak Thakkar and a few other

entities from accessing the securities market till further directions. The appellant is

holding a demat account jointly with her husband. The allegation against Deepak

Thakkar, husband of the appellant relates to manipulation of the scrip of the

company as discussed in para 5 of the impugned order. The depository participant of

2

the appellant namely Kotak Securities Limited had informed the appellant that the

demat account has been suspended on account of order passed by the Board. It is

submitted by the appellant that she had acquired 40,000 shares of an unlisted public

company, namely, Speedy Multimode Ltd., earlier known as Speedy Transport Pvt.

Ltd. These shares are lying in the frozen demat account for the last six years. The

shares belonging to an unlisted public company are generally illiquid and cannot be

easily off-loaded in the market. She is keen on disposing of the shares at the earliest

as she has been able to identify a buyer. The appellant has prayed that the

respondent Board may be directed to defreeze her demat account for the limited

purpose of permitting her to dispose of 40,000 shares of Speedy Multimode Ltd. It

has been further submitted by the appellant that Deepak Thakkar, husband of the

appellant, has preferred an appeal before this Tribunal (Appeal No. 222 of 2011)

against the impugned order and this Tribunal, by order dated February 17, 2012, has

permitted Deepak Thakkar to dispose of the shares of Speedy Multimode Ltd. lying

in his demat account. The appellant had made a request to the Board vide her letter

dated February 27, 2012 to defreeze her account. This request is followed by

reminders dated March 15, 2012, March 27, 2012 and April 24, 2012 but the

respondent Board has not replied to the same. It is submitted by the appellant that

there is no investigation pending against her and, therefore, the shares lying in her

demat account cannot be a subject matter of the impugned order. The appellant

prays that the impugned order dated January 28, 2010 be set aside and the respondent

Board be directed to defreeze the demat account and the appellant be permitted to

sell the aforesaid shares.

2. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, we are of the view that the

prayer of the appellant permitting her to dispose of the shares mentioned above

deserves to be allowed. The appellant is holding joint demat account with her

husband with the depository participant Kotal Securities Ltd. bearing client I.D. No.

112009266. Admittedly, there is no investigation pending against the appellant. It is

Deepak Thakkar, husband of the appellant, whose role in manipulating the scrip of

the company is under investigation. The only reason for freezing the account of the

3

appellant was that husband of the appellant is second holder of the demat account.

In the case of Deepak Thakkar, this Tribunal, vide order dated February 17, 2012,

has already permitted him to dispose of the shares keeping in view of the fact that the

restraint order was passed almost three years back and he was out of market during

all this period. Admittedly, the appellant has never been called by the respondent

Board for any kind of investigation.

3. For the reasons stated above, the Board is directed to permit the appellant to

sale 40,000 shares of Speedy Multimode Ltd. lying in her demat account with the

Kotak Securities Ltd. Learned counsel for the appellant, on instructions, states that

in case any adverse order is passed by the Board with regard to the holdings in the

joint demat account of the appellant and her husband and the amount is required in

the satisfaction of the orders that may be passed, the appellant undertakes that the

amount of sale proceeds will be made available to the Board. The appellant will

furnish details of the shares being disposed of, the price at which they were

purchased, sale price and the person to whom the shares are being sold. The

information shall be provided to the Board within one week from the date of the sale

of the shares.

The appeal stands disposed of as above with no order as to costs.

Accordingly the Miscellaneous Application also stands disposed of.

Sd/-
P. K. Malhotra
Member &
Presiding Officer ( Offg .)

Sd/-  
                                                                     S. S. N. Moorthy         
                 Member  

26.6.2012
Prepared & Compared by
ptm