2025 (11) TMI 688

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d Ms. Alisha Mohite, Advocates i/b. Parinam Law Associates ORDER ON INTERIM PRAYER FOR STAY Per: Justice P. S. Dinesh Kumar, Presiding Officer Appellant has challenged the order dated June 27, 2025 passed by National Stock Exchange Ltd. NSEIL imposing a penalty of Rs. 23.46 Crores being the profit earned and loss incurred. 2. Shri Kunal Katariya, learned Advocate for the appellant submitted that appellant is not liable for any penalty at all and prayed that pending disposal of this appeal the impugned order may be stayed. 3. Shri Shiraz Rustomjee, learned Senior Advocate for the NSE argued opposing the interim prayer. 4. Brief facts of the case are, appellant is a registered trading member of NSEIL enabled for trading in t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e further submitted that appellant is one of the big traders and recovery of penalty shall not be difficult, in the event appellant loses this appeal. 7. He further submitted that assuming but not admitting that appellant is liable for penalty, at best the same can be equivalent to one set of transaction being 100% of profit earned, whereas NSE has imposed penalty on both sides of the transaction. 8. Opposing the application, Shri Rustomjee adverted to the table contained in paragraph No. 6 of the impugned order. He pointed out that on March 30, 2022 appellant has purchased 49,79,50 contracts of Nifty Equity Index Derivatives from one of the promoters, Mr. Parikh and sold 49,90,000 contracts on the very next day. He contended that eve....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... said norm. He further contended that appellant claims to be one of the big traders and no financial hardship is pleaded. Therefore, the balance of convenience is not in appellant's favour. 13. The reversal transactions between the appellant and its promoters is not denied. Shri Katariya's contention that the reversal transactions were for legitimate cause needs to be tested after completion of pleadings at the stage of final hearing. The tabular column in paragraph No. 6 prima facie shows that the transactions between the appellant and Mr. Parikh amounted to about 99% of the volume in the market. Appellant has been penalized in the past for the allegation of abnormal and non-genuine transactions. 14. So far as the alternative submiss....