Devendra Suresh Gupta vs Securities And Exchange Board Of India

M. T. Joshi, J

Heard the both sides. By the present Misc. Application, the applicant is seeking condonation of delay of 201 days in filing the appeal.

The reasons forwarded in the application is that while the present applicant is Devendra Suresh Gupta, the impugned order was received at his

house by his mother in the envelope in which the name was shown as Suresh Devendra Gupta. The applicant was not aware of the passing of the

impugned order. Thereafter, the applicant himself vide letters dated February 11, 2019, February 18, 2019 and March 8, 2019 applied for the certified

copy of the impugned order. The said copy of the impugned order was delivered to him on March 14, 2019. For these reasons, the applicant wants the

delay be condoned and appeal be admitted.

It was pointed out by the learned counsel for the respondent - Securities and Exchange Board of India that the copy was served upon the appellant

by an email also. It was further submitted that it is not the case of the applicant that the hard copy was not served at his address. As per his own

submission, the said copy was received by his mother and the name on the copy of the impugned order is correct one. It was, therefore, submitted that

the appellant is merely making excuses of the clerical mistake occurred in the name of the appellant shown on the envelope in the wrong manner.

Upon hearing both the sides, we are of the opinion that cause shown is not sufficient and is not justified. It is to be noted that the copy of the order

was duly delivered at the address of the applicant and it was admittedly received by the applicant’s mother. Merely because some clerical mistake

in the name of the applicant on the envelop had occurred no excuse can be taken as the acceptance of the delivery of the mother of the appellant and

handing over to the same applicant is established. Even otherwise, the condonation application was filed by the applicant in the Tribunal on May 14,

2019 i.e. after two months of the delivery of the second copy of the impugned order.

Considering the facts on record, we do not find any justification in condoning the delay. The Misc. application is hereby dismissed and, accordingly,

the appeal is also disposed of.