Justice J.P. Devadhar (Oral)

1. Appellant is aggrieved by order passed by the Whole Time Member (WTM) of Securities and Exchange Board of India ( SEBI for short) on 27 th May, 2015. By that order, application made by Appellant seeking extension of 24 months for making refund to the investors in compliance with the order passed by WTM of SEBI on 21 st June, 2013 has been rejected. By order dated 21 st June, 2013, WTM of SEBI had directed the Appellant to wind -2- up the scheme identified as CIS and refund the monies collected from the investors within a period of three months.

2. Challenging the aforesaid order, Appellant had filed an appeal before this Tribunal. While dismissing the said appeal and upholding the order of SEBI, this Tribunal on 23 rd July, 2013 had extended the time to comply with the order of SEBI by 18 months and directed the Appellant to submit a report to SEBI every six months giving details of the progress made in relation to amounts refunded to the investors. Liberty was also given to Appellant to approach SEBI seeking extension of time in case the need arises.

3. Based on the bank certificates dated 21/2/2014, 12/9/2014 and 17/3/2015, Appellant claims to have refunded Rs.1127,05,80,926 out of the total amount of Rs.1916,39,43,857 refundable to the investors. Thus, leaving balance amount of Rs.789,33,62,931 refundable to the investors as on 31/3/2015.

4. The Appellant had filed an application before SEBI on 22/1/2015 seeking extension of time to refund the balance amount. That application is rejected by the impugned order mainly on the ground that despite letter dated 9/12/2014 and reminder letter dated 20/3/2015 the Appellant has failed to furnish registration number and address of the investors to whom the payments were made. Since requisite particulars were not furnished, it is held that the claim made by the Appellant regarding refund could not be verified and hence the application seeking extension of time has been rejected.

5. Admittedly, the requisite particulars called for have not been furnished till date. Without verifying the claim made by the Appellant, the WTM of SEBI could not have granted extension of time. Failure on part of the -3- Appellant to comply with the direction of WTM of SEBI without any reason is highly unjustified. However, looking to the fact that the Appellant claims to have paid Rs.1127,05,80,926 to the investors by relying on bank statements and Counsel for Appellant states that requisite particulars would be furnished within a period of two weeks from today, in the interest of justice, we set aside the impugned order dated 27/5/2015 subject to payment of cost of Rs.1 lac to be paid by Appellant to SEBI within a period of one week from today. Appellant is further directed to furnish the particulars demanded by SEBI vide letters dated 9/12/2014 and 20/3/2015 as also the particulars set out in para 13 of the impugned order within a period of two weeks from today. If the requisite particulars are furnished within the time stipulated herein, then the WTM of SEBI shall verify the same and pass appropriate order on the application filed by the Appellant in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the Appellant. If the Appellant fails to furnish requisite particulars within the time stipulated herein, the order passed on 27/5/2015 shall stand revived.

6. Appeal as well as the Misc. Application are disposed of in the above terms. Sd/- Justice J.P. Devadhar Presiding Officer Sd/- Jog Singh Member 15/06/2015 prepared & compared by-ddg