9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (12) TMI 615X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ioner, Mr Andhyarujina, learned Senior Counsel for Respondent No. 1 and Mr Carvalho, learned Counsel for Respondent No. 2. 2. The Petitioner challenges the communications dated 18 May 2023 and 8 January 2024 at Exhibits 'A' and 'B' to this Petition. 3. Both the impugned communications are identical, and therefore, we transcribe the contents of the communications of 8 January 2024 for the convenience of reference: Securities and Exchange Board of India Assistant General Manager Market Intermediaries Regulation & Supervision Department-SEC-5 SEBI/HO/MIRSD/SEC5/SA/MP/9/OW/2024/1077/1/ January 08, 2024 Standard Chartered Bank Collection Unit, 23/25, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Fort, Mumbai 400001 Dear Sir/Madam, Sub: Clarif ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... opinion in the context of Section 37 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 ("SARFAESI Act"). 5. In its reply, SEBI has styled these communications as "private communications" and submitted that they are not orders but private communications with no binding effect. The statement in paragraph C-i of the SEBI's affidavit is relevant in the above regard and is transcribed below for the convenience of reference: "C No Writ can lie against private communications i Further, the Impugned Communications are merely private letters addressed to the Petitioner wherein the Respondent No. 1 has communicated only its opinion. From the perusal of the records and proceedings in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t 'M') directing Respondent Nos. 4 and 6 in this Petition not to dispose of or alienate any of the assets, whether movable or immovable (including funds in their bank accounts), or create any interest or charge in any such assets, till such time the refunds/repayments as directed in paragraphs 61 (f) and 61 (g) are completed. This order is not challenged in this petition. 9. The Petitioner's case is that Respondent Nos. 4 and 6 had borrowed amounts from the Petitioner bank and have defaulted in the payment of the same. The Petitioner's case also involves initiating proceedings under the SARFAESI Act 2002, in which the Petitioner has already taken possession of the properties of Respondent Nos. 4 and 5. It is, therefore, the Petitioner's ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... remedy available to the Petitioner under Section 15-T of the SEBI Act. 13. Therefore, in peculiar facts of the present case, the interest of justice would be met if the Petitioner is relegated to the remedy of appeal under Section 15-T of the SEBI Act. Such an appeal had to be filed within forty-five days. However, the proviso to Section 15T (3) provides that the Securities Appellate Tribunal ("SAT") may entertain an appeal after the expiry of the said period of forty-five days if it is satisfied that there was sufficient cause for not filing it within that period. 14. The Petitioner was pursuing this Petition bona fide. The Petitioner, possibly based on legal advice, may not have found it appropriate to institute an appeal against SEBI' ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
