2019 (12) TMI 1271

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Aayush Kothari, for Respondent. Dr. C.K.G. Nair, Member 1. Not on Board. Mentioned by the learned Senior Counsel for the appellant for urgent hearing. 2. This appeal has been filed by Bajaj Finance Limited, a Non Banking Financial Company ('NBFC' for short) aggrieved by the interim order of the Whole Time Member ('WTM' for short) of the Securities and Exchange Board of India ('SEBI' for short) dated November 22, 2019 in the matter of M/s. Karvy Stock Broking Ltd. ('Karvy' for short). Appellant is particularly aggrieved by direction no. (iv) in the said order which reads as follows:- "(iv) The Depositories shall not allow transfer of securities from DP account no. 11458979, named KARVY STOCK....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e all SEBI. 5. It was further contended that since Karvy violated certain clauses of the loan agreement and withdrew beyond the sanctioned amount a Loan Recall Notice was issued to Karvy on November 20, 2019 seeking refund of the full outstanding loan of Rs. 345 crore (approximately) along with interest and charges. In the event of failure by Karvy to refund the same the appellant was planning to invoke the pledge. However on account of the impugned order dated November 22, 2019 which inter alia prohibited transfer of securities from DP account no. 11458979; named KARVY STOCK BROKING LTD. (BSE) with immediate effect the appellant could not invoke the pledge. At the same time before passing such an order which affected its rights the appe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....exact information on which is not available because neither NSE nor the Depositories have been arrayed as parties in this appeal. In any case it was contended by the learned senior counsel that the appellant has recourse to the civil remedy. 7. Learned Senior Counsel Shri Vikram Nankani representing Karvy, Respondent No. 2 submits that he has no instructions on the matter. 8. Having heard the parties we find that the impugned order notes that Karvy had raised funds pledging securities from banks and NBFCs and therefore was aware that rights of those entities would be impacted by the said order. As such, even if they could not be heard while passing the impugned order atleast on their representation they were entitled to be heard. It i....