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

In the matter of IFCI Financial Services Ltd

Jun 13, 2006
|
Orders : Orders of SAT

IN THE SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

MUMBAI

 

Appeal No. 5 of 2005

 

Date of Decision

13.6.2006

 

 

IFCI Financial Services Ltd.

……

Appellant

 

Versus

 

 

 

1.Securities & Exchange Board of India

2. National Stock Exchange of India Ltd.

 

……

 

Respondents

 

Present :  Mr. Bharat Merchant, Advocate for the appellant

                  Mr. Dipan Merchant, Sr. Advocate & Mr. U.N. Das, Advocate          for respondent no. 1

 

Coram:

          Justice N.K. Sodhi, Presiding Officer

            R. N. Bhardwaj, Member

 

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

 

            IFCI Financial Services Ltd. is the appellant before us.  It claims to be a 100% subsidiary of the Industrial Finance Corporation of India.  The grievance made in this appeal is that the Securities and Exchange Board of India (for short the Board) has not given to the appellant the benefit of the fee paid by the parent company at the time when it was registered as a broker with the Board.  The question whether the parent company was at all registered as a broker is seriously disputed by the learned counsel appearing for the Board.  The appellant has not placed any material on record to even prima facie show that the parent company was at any time registered with the Board.  If the parent company was never registered as a broker, the question of the benefit of fee continuity being passed on to its subsidiary does not arise.

   2.            Another grievance made by the appellant is that the Board has charged higher rates in calculating the fee liability of the appellant which was not justified.  No material has been placed on the record to substantiate this plea either.  In the normal course we would have dismissed the appeal but we are not adopting this course lest it results in miscarriage of justice.  The appellant may, if so advised, approach the respondent by making a representation in regard to the relief sought in this appeal.  If such a representation is made, the Board will consider the same and pass an order thereon in accordance with law.

   3.            The appeal stands disposed of as above.

 


Justice N.K. Sodhi
Presiding Officer


R.N.Bhardwaj
Member

 

13.6.2006