https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459976 The Madras High Court noted that the writ petitions had been dismissed because an alternative remedy was available, but the later constitution of the Securities Appellate Tribunal with a Judicial Member removed that impediment. The appellants were therefore permitted to pursue the statutory appeal before the Tribunal instead of maintaining the writ appeals. The Court also directed the Tribunal not to insist on limitation if the appeals were filed within the stipulated period, and it continued interim protection until the Tribunal considered the appeals and any interlocutory applications. en-us Thu, 22 Aug 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 07 Jan 2025 15:02:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459976 The Madras High Court noted that the writ petitions had been dismissed because an alternative remedy was available, but the later constitution of the Securities Appellate Tribunal with a Judicial Member removed that impediment. The appellants were therefore permitted to pursue the statutory appeal before the Tribunal instead of maintaining the writ appeals. The Court also directed the Tribunal not to insist on limitation if the appeals were filed within the stipulated period, and it continued interim protection until the Tribunal considered the appeals and any interlocutory applications. Case-Laws SEBI Thu, 22 Aug 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459976