<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2025 (11) TMI 1565 - SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI (LB)</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782097</link>
    <description>A trading-terminal connectivity glitch lasting 29 minutes was found to have been addressed through corrective measures, including recovery of the affected gateways, one by manual restart. The appellant had signed the risk disclosure declaration under the relevant master circular and was therefore treated as having accepted the risks of electronic trading, including system or network congestion. A claim for monetary loss based on the alleged trading loss could not be granted in this summary appellate proceeding because it required adjudication on evidence before a competent forum. Relief in the appeal was therefore declined, leaving the damages claim to be pursued separately.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 30 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 25 Nov 2025 08:55:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=866982" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (11) TMI 1565 - SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI (LB)</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782097</link>
      <description>A trading-terminal connectivity glitch lasting 29 minutes was found to have been addressed through corrective measures, including recovery of the affected gateways, one by manual restart. The appellant had signed the risk disclosure declaration under the relevant master circular and was therefore treated as having accepted the risks of electronic trading, including system or network congestion. A claim for monetary loss based on the alleged trading loss could not be granted in this summary appellate proceeding because it required adjudication on evidence before a competent forum. Relief in the appeal was therefore declined, leaving the damages claim to be pursued separately.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>SEBI</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 30 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782097</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>