1. Home
  2. »
  3. Enforcement
  4. »
  5. Orders
  6. »
  7. Orders of SAT

Order in the matter of Bipin R. Vora

Jan 30, 2006
|
Orders : Orders of SAT

IN THE SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

MUMBAI

 

Appeal No.30/2006

 

Date of Decision

13.02.2006

 

In the matter of:

 

Bipin R. Vora

Appellant – Represented by Mr. Rajeev Kumar,  Advocate. 

Versus

 

 

Securities & Exchange Board of India

Respondent – Represented by Mr. Mihir Mody Advocate.

Coram:

          Justice N. K. Sodhi, Presiding Officer

          C. Bhattacharya, Member

          R. N. Bhardwaj, Member

Per:   Justice N. K. Sodhi, Presiding Officer (Oral)

            This appeal filed under section 15 T of the Securities and Exchange Board  of India Act, 1992 (for short “the Act”) deserves to be allowed on the short  ground that the Board in the impugned order has given no reasons whatsoever while agreeing with the findings recorded by the inquiry officer.  The operative portion of the impugned order reads as under:

          “Having examined the Enquiry Report, the Show Cause Notice       issued to the broker and the reply from the broker reiterating   the    submissions already made before Enquiry Officer, and          the oral and written submissions made before me during the          personal hearing, I agree with findings and the        recommendation of the Enquiry Officer.”

2.       Serious allegations had been leveled against the appellant alleging that he had violated the provisions of the Act and the Code of Conduct prescribed under the regulations and he is a registered broker with the Bombay Stock Exchange.  The least that is expected from a quasi judicial  body like the Board is to apply its mind after considering the material on record and then come to its own conclusions even if it agrees with the findings of the enquiry officer.  It is not enough for the Board to say that it agrees with the findings of  the enquiry officer without recording its own reasons and without considering the material on record.  In this view of the matter it is not necessary for us to go into the merits of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant.

3.       In the result,  the appeal is allowed,  impugned order dated 25/1/2006 set aside and the case  remanded to the Board for a fresh decision in accordance with law after passing a speaking order. The appellant through his counsel is directed to appear before the Board on March 6, 2006 for further proceedings.  No costs.

Justice N. K. Sodhi

Presiding Officer

C. Bhattacharya

Member

R. N. Bhardwaj

Member

13/02/2006.