9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 1830X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... March 19, 2015 and the final order was passed on September 5, 2017 whereby, inter alia, Kassa was directed to refund / return client's money / securities with 15% interest thereon. It was also stated in the order that Kassa admitted to taking loans from clients by offering fixed returns. The appellant before us is unable to produce any evidence relating to her trading in securities. The appellant is neither able to provide any convincing reason why no trading was done for about a year of having the trading account except a vague statement that her instructions to the broker was never implemented. Record produced before us clearly indicate that interest was paid to the appellant by Kassa. The statement on dividend itself is not ver ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ;Kassa' for short), a defaulter stock broker of the NSE, was not admitted for payment from the Investor Protection Fund ('IPF') of the NSE. The claim was rejected on the ground that the said amount of ₹ 8,89,620/- purportedly provided as margin money for trading in securities was in fact a transaction in the nature of loans. 2. The argument of Shri Gaayan Sethi, Learned Counsel for the appellant is that the appellant, a small investor, opened a trading account with Kassa (A/C. No. CX0869) on March 18, 2014 and transferred number of shares of 10 companies with off market trade instruction to Kassa's account on April 2, 2014. The appellant received ₹ 8457 on July 9, 2014 and ₹ 5575 on October 10, 201 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ecause collecting loans by the broker purportedly in the name of margin money is prohibited. To support the argument the Learned Counsel for the NSE relied on the financial ledger of Kassa from April 1, 2013 to March 31, 2015 in respect of the appellant herein. This statement shows that interest to the tune of ₹ 9397 has been paid to the appellant upto June 2014 and provision of a tax credit to the tune of ₹ 1634 is also given. All these indicate that the so-called margin money deposited was in the form of a loan since the appellant had never traded in any securities during the period under consideration. 4. We have perused the various documents placed before us and heard the respective submissions of the Counsel for th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h the appropriate forum to settle her claim against Kassa in case Kassa is not honouring her claim of the deposited amount. 6. We do not find any merit in the argument of the appellant that NSE is liable to compensate the appellant for having failed in their duty as a regulator of brokers. In our order dated January 4, 2018 on a related appeal (Appeal No. 357 of 2017 by Sh. Subhash Chand Bithal vs SEBI) this argument of the appellant therein was rejected since the WTM of SEBI had recalled the SCN issued against NSE. Moreover, NSE as a first line regulator is not liable to compensate for the willful violation committed by the appellant alongwith the broker. 7. Accordingly, we find no merit in the appeal and same is hereby d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
