Tribunals and CommissionsFull Bench(2021) 01 SEBI CK 0019

Shreya Pinto De Andrade And Others vs Securities And Exchange Board Of India And Others

Securities Appellate Tribunal Mumbai · Decided on 20 January 2021

HON’BLE JUDGES
Tarun Agarwala, Presiding Officer · Dr. C. K. G. Nair, Member · M. T. Joshi, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Appeal No.129, 130, 131, 132 Of 2020

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

18 paragraphs · 389 words

Tarun Agarwala, Presiding Officer

1.

In this group of appeals a common issue arises. Their complaints have been disposed of on the SCORES platform against which the appeals have

been filed. It transpires that the appellants had invested some monies with a sub-broker Mr. Ameet Savant who was giving assured returns. The

appellants tried to redeem their monies and when the same was not returned a complaint was filed. The complaint has been disposed of on the

SCORES platform on the ground that the appellant is not registered with Ventura Securities Ltd. (‘Ventura’ for short) and that the monies has

been given to Mr. Ameet Savant which is a proprietary concern and which has nothing to do with the SEBI Act, Rules and Regulations.

2.

Having heard the learned counsel for SEBI Shri Anubhav Ghosh and Shri P.N. Modi, the learned senior counsel for Ventura, Respondent No. 2,

we find that admittedly Mr. Ameet Savant was a registered sub-broker of Ventura. Whether Mr. Ameet Savant had received money as a proprietary

concern or on behalf of the principal, namely, Ventura is something which is required to be investigated. The appellants have alleged that the monies

given to Mr. Ameet Savant eventually came into the accounts of Ventura. This fact also required to be investigated. The mere fact that the Mr.

Ameet Savant is separately been investigated by SEBI is not sufficient. These complaints cannot be disposed of in a summary manner.

3.

We accordingly set aside the impugned communication given to the appellants and remit the matter to SEBI to reconsider the complaints of the

appellants and decide the same in accordance with law in the light of the observations made above preferably within a period of two months from

today. All the appeals are allowed. No order on costs.

4.

The present matter was heard through video conference due to Covid-19 pandemic. At this stage it is not possible to sign a copy of this order nor a

certified copy of this order could be issued by the registry. In these circumstances, this order will be digitally signed by the Private Secretary on behalf

of the bench and all concerned parties are directed to act on the digitally signed copy of this order. Parties will act on production of a digitally signed

copy sent by fax and/or email.