BEFORE THE SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
MUMBAI
Date : 25.02.2019
Appeal No. 307 of 2018
1. Nicer Green Housing Infrastructure
Developers Ltd.
2. Pipal Singh
3. Ranjit Singh
4. Surinder Kaur
5. Karanjit Singh
Sardar Colony, Near Gupta Petrol
Pump, Firozepur City,
Punjab 152 002.

……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. J. S. Saluja, Advocate for the Appellants.
Mr. Mustafa Doctor, Senior Advocate with Ms. Vidhi Jhawar,
Mr. Anubhav Ghosh, Advocates i/b The Law Point for the
Respondent.
CORAM : Justice Tarun Agarwala, Presiding Officer
Dr. C. K. G. Nair, Member
Per : Justice Tarun Agarwala, Presiding Officer (Oral)
1.

The Appellant No. 1 is a company incorporated under the
Companies Act, 1956 as a public limited company and is engaged in
the business of acquiring agricultural land and developing the same
for the purpose of re-sale. Securities and Exchange Board of India
(hereinafter referred to as, ‘SEBI’) found that the activity of fund
mobilization by the appellant no. 1 under its scheme fell within the
2
ambit of “Collective Investment Scheme” as defined under Section
11AA of Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992
(hereinafter referred to as, ‘SEBI Act’). SEBI issued an order dated
November 9, 2015 under Section 19 read with Sections 11(1), 11B
and 11(4) of the SEBI Act read with Regulation 65 of Securities and
Exchange Board of India (Collective Investment Schemes)
Regulations, 1999 issuing a slew of directions restraining the
appellant and its directors from collecting any money from the
investors or to launch or to carry out any investments schemes. SEBI
further directed to refund the money collected under its scheme to the
investors and thereafter wind up the company.
2.

The appellants being aggrieved by the said order filed an Appeal
No. 86 of 2017 before the Securities Appellate Tribunal wherein the
appellants contended that they are ready and willing to comply with
the order passed by SEBI contending that out of an amount of
Rs. 31.71 crore collected the appellants have already refunded
Rs. 27.48 crore and that the appellants are ready and willing to
refund the balance amount in a time bound manner. Based on the
said contention the appeal was disposed of by the Tribunal by the
order dated November 13, 2017 directing the appellants to make a
representation setting out in detail the amounts already paid to the
investors, their names, the quantum of amount paid and the mode and
manner in which the balance amount would be payable to the
remaining investors. The Tribunal directed that if such a
3
representation
was
filed alongwith details, SEBI would
decide the same in accordance with law.
3.

Based on the said order, a representation dated November 25,
2017 was made by the appellants which was disposed of by the
impugned order dated June 1, 2018. SEBI held that no proof has
been filed by the appellants to indicate the amounts paid by the
appellants to the investors. The appellants being aggrieved by the
said order have filed the present appeal.
4.

Having heard the learned counsel for the appellants and upon
perusal of the memo of appeal and the impugned order, we find that
no proof has been filed either before SEBI or even before this
Tribunal to show that the appellants had refunded a sum of Rs. 27.48
crore and that they are ready and willing to pay the balance amount
in a time bound manner. In the absence of any evidence being filed,
we are of the opinion that there is no infirmity in the order passed by
SEBI disposing of their representations.
5.

The appeal lack merit and is dismissed summarily.

Sd/Justice Tarun Agarwala
Presiding Officer
Sd/Dr. C. K. G. Nair
Member
25.02.2019
Prepared & Compared by
PTM