TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 2008X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tically - HELD THAT:- Merely because SEBI has referred the orders passed under regulation 28(2) of the Delisting Regulations as circulars cannot be a ground to deny the appellant his right to file an appeal against the said circulars which are in fact orders passed under the Delisting Regulations. In our opinion, the argument advanced on behalf of the appellant is wholly misconceived. Impugned circulars issued by SEBI contain administrative directions given by SEBI to the stock exchanges in relation to all companies which are exclusively listed on de-recognized / non-operational stock exchanges. Since the directions contained in the said circulars are not restricted to any particular company but are generally applicable to all the c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... operational stock exchanges to get listed on nationwide stock exchanges. Thus, the appellant is wholly unjustified in arguing that the impugned circulars constitute orders under regulation 28(2) of the Delisting Regulations. Conduct of the appellant in pursuing the appeal by raising such frivolous grounds inspite of the decision of the Apex Court in NSDL (Supra) is reprehensible. The appeal is dismissed with costs quantified at ₹ 10,000/- to be paid by the appellant. - Appeal No. 97 of 2015 - - - Dated:- 23-11-2017 - Justice J.P. Devadhar, Presiding Officer, Jog Singh, Member, Dr. C.K.G. Nair, Member and Per: Justice J.P. Devadhar (Oral) For the Appellant:-Mr. Somasekhar Sundaresan, Advocate with Mr. Dhaval Kothari, Mr. As ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... held that the circulars issued by SEBI could be challenged before this Tribunal. Since the said decision of this Tribunal is reversed by the Apex Court in the case of SEBI v/s NSDL reported in (2017) 5 SCC 517 it is submitted that the appeal is not maintainable before this Tribunal. 4. Counsel for the appellant, however, submitted that the decision of the Apex Court in the case of the SEBI v/s NSDL (Supra) is not applicable to the facts of the present case. In support of the above contention counsel for the appellant relied on a decision of this Tribunal in the case of J. Kumar Infra projects Ltd. v/s SEBI Ors. (Appeal No. 174 of 2017 decided on 10.08.2017). Counsel for the appellant further submitted that the impugned circulars are no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... impugned circulars, in view of the decision of the Apex Court in case of NSDL (Supra) proper course to be adopted by the appellant is to take appropriate steps in judicial review proceedings and not by way of an appeal before this Tribunal. 8. Reliance placed by the counsel for the appellant on the decision of this Tribunal in case of J. Kumar Infra projects Ltd. (Supra) is wholly misplaced. In that case, the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA) had addressed a letter calling upon SEBI to investigate as to whether the 331 companies named therein which were suspected to be Shell Companies were in fact Shell Companies and whether the said companies had any credentials/ fundamentals. Without conducting any investigation SEBI had inter alia d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
