IN THE SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
MUMBAI
|
Date of Hearing
|
14/03/2005
|
|
Date of Decision
|
14/03/2005
|
Appeal No: 4 of 2005
|
|
Appellant – Represented by:
|
|
Rakesh Mehta
|
Mr. Vinay Chauhan, Advocate
|
|
Versus
|
|
|
Securities & Exchange Board of India
|
Respondent- Represented by
|
|
|
Mr.Ravi Hegde, Advocate
|
| |
|
|
CORAM
Justice Kumar Rajaratnam, Presiding Officer
1. Appeal taken up for disposal with the consent of parties.
2. The appellant challenges the order passed by the respondent dated 29/11/2002 wherein the appellant pending enquiry has been restrained from accessing the capital market. The appellant is a broker registered with BSE. The appellant also was a Director of the Company known as Renaissance Securities Limited. The learned counsel for the appellant stated that the appellant resigned from Renaissance Securities Limited on 10th October, 2001.
3. A CBI enquiry was ordered against the Chairman of the Unit Trust of India and other officials of the UTI alleging that there were irregularities with the private placement of shares of Cyberspace to UTI.
4. It also came to the notice of SEBI that CBI arrested Shri Rakesh G. Mehta, Director of Renaissance Securities Limited for his alleged involvement in the irregularities with respect to UTI. Subsequently a show cause notice was issued to the appellant in his capacity as a Director of Renaissance Securities Limited to show cause why a Section 11B order should not be passed against the appellant which is now pending enquiry for 3 years without any final orders.
5. SEBI also passed an order directing the appellant not to access the securities market pending enquiry. Being aggrieved by the interim order passed by the respondent the appellant has preferred this appeal.
6. The enquiry is pending for 3 years without any finality and pending enquiry the appellant has not been permitted to access the securities market. The Tribunal directed the respondent to file an affidavit as to when the enquiry will be completed. The respondent filed an affidavit stating that the enquiry will be completed as expeditiously as possible.
7. Considering the fact that the appellant has suffered an injunction from accessing the capital market for almost three years pending enquiry it would be appropriate to direct the respondent to complete the enquiry and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within six months from the date of this order.
8. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs.
(Pronounced in Court)
|
|
(Justice Kumar Rajaratnam)
Presiding Officer
|
Place: Mumbai
Date: 14/03/2005
*/as