9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (10) TMI 111X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... find that any effort was made to serve at the place where he carried on business or had worked for gain. Thus, without complying with the procedure adopted under Clause (a) and (b) of Rule 7 the respondent cannot take direct steps for affixation under Clause (c). Further, we find that the show cause notice that was sent by speed post came back undelivered. No effort was made to find out as to whether the appellant was residing at that premises or not Mode of service prescribed under Rule 7 is not exhaustive and other modes of service was always available in addition to the modes of service prescribed under Rule 7 i.e. for example publication of the notice in an appropriate newspaper or service through email. In this regard, we find that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d cannot be sustained. The impugned order is accordingly quashed. The appeal is allowed - MISC. APPLICATION NO.302 OF 2017 AND APPEAL NO.327 OF 2017 - - - Dated:- 18-7-2019 - Mr Tarun Agarwala, Presiding Officer, Dr. C. K. G. Nair, Member And Mr M. T. Joshi, Judicial Member For The Appellant : Mr. Neville P. Lashkari, Advocate with Mr. Aditya Vyas, Advocate i/b. Vertices Partners For The Respondent : Mr. Gaurav Joshi, Senior Advocate with Mr. Anubhav Ghosh and Ms. Rashi Dalmia, Advocates i/b. The Law Point JUDGMENT Per : Justice Tarun Agarwala Misc. Application No.302 of 2017 There is a delay of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... osed for violation of Clause 3.3.1 of the Model Code of Conduct prescribed under Regulation 12(1) of the PIT Regulations and another sum of ₹ 1 crore was imposed for violation of Clause 4.2 of the Code of Conduct prescribed under Part A of Schedule 1 under Regulation 12(1) of the PIT Regulations. The appellant, being aggrieved by the said order, has filed the appeal on the ground that the impugned order is an ex-parte order and that he had no knowledge of the proceedings initiated by the Adjudicating Officer. 2. The undisputed facts which are culled out from the impugned order and from the affidavits filed in the appeal is, that in relation to the alleged sale of 45,000 shares made by the appellant SEBI issued an ema ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aid admitted facts the Adjudicating Officer presumed sufficient service and proceeded ex-parte and passed the impugned order imposing the penalty. 4. The appellant contends that he had furnished the desired information to SEBI through email dated March 13, 2013 and thereafter he did not receive any further queries from SEBI. In July 2014, he sold his residence and shifted and consequently the show cause notice and the notice for hearing which was sent to his earlier residential address was not received as he had already left that premises. 5. The fact that the appellant had sold his residential flat/house has not been disputed by SEBI. It was however contended that service was made as per the procedure la ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d on, or last carried on, business or personally works, or last worked, for gain: ( c) if it cannot be served under clause (a) or clause (b), by affixing it on the outer door or some other conspicuous part of the premises in which that person resides or is known to have last resided, or carried on business or personally works or last worked for gain and that written report thereof should be witnessed by two persons. 8. The aforesaid rule provided the manner of service of the notice namely by delivering or tendering it to the person or to his authorized agent or by sending it by registered post acknowledgment due to the address of his place of residence or his last known place of residence or t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ade efforts to get the show cause notice served through the broker of the appellant. It is strange that when the email id of the appellant was known to the respondent which is quoted in the impugned order, but made no effort to serve the show cause notice or the notice for date of hearing through email. 10. In addition to the modes prescribed under the Rules of 1995, other modes could also be utilized such as O29R2 of CPC or under the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Manner of Service of Summons and Notices issued by the Board) (Amendment) Regulations, 2007 which has been issued in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 30 of the SEBI Act, 1992 which provides various modes for tendering notice to a person which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
