Rohit Mansukhani vs Securities & Exchange Board Of India

Tarun Agarwala, Presiding Officer

The appellant has challenged the order dated October 21, 2022 passed by the Whole Time Member (hereinafter referred to as ‘WTM’) of Securities and Exchange Board of India (hereinafter referred to as ‘SEBI’) against The Bombay Dyeing & Manufacturing Co. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as ‘Bombay Dyeing’). The appellant was neither a party to the proceedings nor the order is against him.

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that the proceedings were imitated against the Bombay Dyeing only upon the complaint filed by him and, therefore, he is an aggrieved person, since the order passed by the authority has not been properly passed.

Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant, we find that only an aggrieved person can file an appeal against the order of SEBI under Section 15T of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992. The impugned order does not affect the appellant, in any way, nor anything has been shown as to how the appellant is aggrieved by any finding of the WTM in the impugned order. No material or evidence has been produced which would necessitate the appellant to file an appeal. Further, the appellant has not impleaded Bombay Dyeing as a respondent in the present appeal.

We are of the opinion that the appellant is not a person aggrieved and is neither a proper or necessary party. The mere fact that he has filed a complaint does not entitle him to file an appeal.

The appeal is not maintainable and is dismissed as such.

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. Certified copy of this order is also available from the Registry on payment of usual charges.