9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (11) TMI 1274X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gn blank transfer deed - Respondent has also failed to render any explanation for four years delay in applying for duplicate share certificates. No satisfactory explanation for four years delay in applying for duplicate share certificates has been put forth by the respondent. The continued receipt of dividends after the sale of certificates reflects an attempt on his behalf to take benefit from shares, he no longer owned. It is well settled that the scope of interference with the decision of any Authority under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is limited. Even though, it was contended on behalf of the respondent that the decision of the Disciplinary Committee was perverse and unreasonable, the said contention is found to be wholly bereft of any merit - the Disciplinary Committee found that respondent had failed to act in a bona fide manner and the said conduct was derogatory in nature and highly unbecoming of a Chartered Accountant and brought disrepute to the profession. The punishment awarded to the respondent is not unduly harsh. The recommendation of the Council to the effect that the name of respondent be removed from the Register of Members for a period of six months, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nder:- Thus, in conclusion, in the considered opinion of the Committee, the Respondent is guilty of 'Other Misconduct' under Section 22 read with Section 21 of the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949. 5. The Report of the Disciplinary Committee of the Council was considered in the Special Meeting of the Council held on 14.12.2011 and upon consideration of the Report along with various written representations received from respondent, the Council decided to accept the Report of the Disciplinary Committee and accordingly held him guilty of other misconduct under Section 22 read with Section 21 of the Act. The Council also decided to recommend to the High Court that the name of respondent be removed from the Register of Members for a period of six months. The relevant extract of the Minutes is as under:- Decision : On consideration of the Report of the Disciplinary Committee alongwith the written representation dated 30th May, 2011, 7th June, 2011, 10th July, 2011, 22nd July, 2011, 8th November, 2011, December, 2011 received from the Respondent, the Council decided to accept the report of Disciplinary Committee and accordingly held that the Respondent was guilty of Other Misconduc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nst respondent and found that respondent purchased shares in 1997 and sold them to the complainant in the year 1999, as confirmed by the transfer deed. However, despite selling these shares, he continued to be the registered holder of the shares with the company and continued receiving the dividends until the year 2004. Respondent denied selling the shares to the complainant and instead claimed that the complainant had stolen the share certificates from him when he relocated in the year 2000. However notably, respondent did not file any police report or First Information Report (FIR) regarding the alleged theft. The four years delay in applying for duplicate share certificates remained unexplained. The Committee noted various irregularities in the defence of the respondent. Firstly, respondent claimed that the issue had been amicably settled with the complainant through an agreement. But when pressed for details, respondent failed to provide a copy of the agreement or any concrete evidence of the terms of the settlement. He could not explain how the settlement occurred without any compensation being exchanged nor could he substantiate his claim that complainant had agreed to withdr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... constitute an admission of guilt. It is also argued that complainant did not appear before the Disciplinary Committee, but the Committee proceeded with the enquiry even in the absence of the complainant. It is also argued that there is no evidence of share purchase such as purchase bill, contract note or other similar documents as required by accounting standards and that the Disciplinary Committee relied upon unsubstantiated claims. STAND OF RESPONDENT IN HIS ADDITIONAL AFFIDAVIT DATED 12.08.2024 15. In his additional affidavit, respondent affirmed that he had held 100 shares of M/s. Aban Loyd Chiles Offshore Ltd., which were duly transferred into his name on 05.08.1997. He further stated that in July 2024, he noticed that the original share certificates were not in his possession and therefore he immediately applied for duplicate share certificates. According to him, the shares were in his name on the date when he made a request to company to issue duplicate shares. He had accordingly submitted the indemnity bond and affidavit with the company to obtain duplicate share certificates. 16. Respondent took the stand that he never sold the shares since their initial transfer in his na ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ional standards and do not conduct themselves in a manner which brings disrepute to the profession of Chartered Accountancy. The disciplinary proceeding is principally between ICAI and its members. A complainant merely acts as a relater party that provides information relating to any misconduct on the part of a Chartered Accountant. Although a complainant has a right to be participate in the proceedings; disciplinary proceedings cannot be viewed as a private dispute between the complainant and the Chartered Accountant. It is also true that in most cases, the complainant may also have suffered on account of professional or other misconduct on the part of a Chartered disciplinary proceedings. 28. The conduct of ICAI s member (a Chartered Accountant) is to be evaluated by the concerned authorities of ICAI. The object is to ensure that its members measure up to the standards as set by ICAI for between ICAI and its members. This is also the rationale for not providing any appellate remedy to the complainant against the decision of the concerned authorities in terms of Section 22G of the Act. This right is only available to an aggrieved Member of ICAI. 29. This court is also of the view ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e regards the same, so much so, no FIR was lodged regarding the theft. Respondent has also failed to render any explanation for four years delay in applying for duplicate share certificates. No satisfactory explanation for four years delay in applying for duplicate share certificates has been put forth by the respondent. The continued receipt of dividends after the sale of certificates reflects an attempt on his behalf to take benefit from shares, he no longer owned. 24. Even though, respondent claimed that an amicable settlement has taken place with the complainant, but no copy of the agreement has been produced. It is also not understood as to why the respondent entered into an agreement with the complainant, if he had not sold the shares to him. He would have rather contested the matter and would not have returned shares to the complainant upon compensation being paid to him as per settlement. 25. We find that the findings of the Council and Disciplinary Committee are based on cogent material and reasoning. The record of the case reveals that respondent was the owner of 100 shares of M/s. Aban Loyd Chiles Offshore Ltd. and the same were acquired by him in the year 1997. Thereaft ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
