2025 (11) TMI 966

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ataria and Ms. Aparna Wagle, Advocates Ms. Yugandhara Khanwilkar, Advocate with Ms. Prapti Prajapati, Ms. Avinka Kedar, Advocates i/b. Triad Law Chambers for Respondent No. 2 (Original Appellant) in RA No. 1 of 2024 and Applicant in R.A. No. 22 of 2024. For the Respondent : Ms. Khushbu Chhajed, Advocate with Mr. Nishit Dhruva, Ms. Rasika Ghate and Ms. Khushbu Trivedi, Advocates i/b. MDP Legal, Advocates ORDER Per: Justice P. S. Dinesh Kumar, Presiding Officer These two review applications are directed against order dated October 30, 2023 passed in Appeal No. 20 of 2021 and Appeal No. 308 of 2021. R.A. No. 1 of 2024 is filed by SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India against order in Appeal No. 20 of 2021 and R.A. No. 22 o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cant was placing orders and not Mr. Goyal. In other words, applicant's contention that he had lent his name for a consideration has not been accepted by this Tribunal. She submitted that the WTM Whole Time Member vide order dated October 23, 2019 has held that in appellant's trading account, Mr. Arvind Goyal has carried out the trades. The said finding has been reversed by this Tribunal based on the affidavit filed by the Arvind Goyal. Applicant was not served with the said affidavit, therefore the order impugned is unsustainable in law. 6. Learned Advocate for Arvind Goyal, opposing the review application submitted that this review application is without any merit because all appeals were heard together and based on the material on reco....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ion filed by the Abhay Javlekar (Review Application No. 22 of 2024). His case is that he had lent his name to Arvind Goyal for a consideration of Rs. 10,000/-. Arvind Goyal had given his phone number and email id in the KYC which is demonstrable with the perusal of the KYC annexed to the review application. His further case is, this Tribunal has upset the finding recorded by the WTM and held that Arvind Goyal had not traded from applicant's trading account. This finding is based on the affidavit filed by Arvind Goyal along with call record details. 12. We have carefully perused the impugned order. This Tribunal has noted in para 21 of the impugned order as follows: - "In addition to the aforesaid, an affidavit has been filed bef....