Skip to content


Reliance Industries Ltd. Vs. Securities and Exchange Board of India Sebi Bhavan and Another - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citation

Court

SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT

Decided On

Case Number

Misc. Application No. 84 of 2013 In Appeal No. 224 of 2012

Judge

Appellant

Reliance Industries Ltd.

Respondent

Securities and Exchange Board of India Sebi Bhavan and Another

Excerpt:


.....under consideration. 2. counsel for the applicant submitted that the appellant‐company and its subsidiaries are involved in huge insider trading scam, and the applicant would like to give certain information with regard to insider trading scam. 3. in this case, we are concerned with the correctness of the impugned order dated 2/11/2012. if the applicant makes out a case for interference, appeal would be allowed, failing which appeal would be dismissed. applicant, who is unconnected with the matter, cannot be permitted to intervene in the appeal and make submissions one way or the other. if at all, the applicant has any grievance against the system, he has to initiate proceedings before an appropriate forum and not by way of intervention in this appeal. appeal must succeed or fail on the basis of the arguments advanced by the parties to the appeal and, therefore, applicant who is not a party to the appeal cannot be permitted to intervene in the matter. accordingly, misc. application is rejected.

Judgment:


J.P. Devadhar, Presiding Officer

1. By this Misc. Application No. 84 of 2013, applicant seeks to intervene in Appeal No.224 of 2012 filed by Reliance Industries Ltd. against communication of Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) dated 2/11/2012. By that communication dated 2/11/2012, SEBI has rejected application of the appellant seeking copies of certain documents required for the matter under consideration.

2. Counsel for the applicant submitted that the appellant‐company and its subsidiaries are involved in huge insider trading scam, and the applicant would like to give certain information with regard to insider trading scam.

3. In this case, we are concerned with the correctness of the impugned order dated 2/11/2012. If the applicant makes out a case for interference, appeal would be allowed, failing which appeal would be dismissed. Applicant, who is unconnected with the matter, cannot be permitted to intervene in the appeal and make submissions one way or the other. If at all, the applicant has any grievance against the system, he has to initiate proceedings before an appropriate forum and not by way of intervention in this appeal. Appeal must succeed or fail on the basis of the arguments advanced by the parties to the appeal and, therefore, applicant who is not a party to the appeal cannot be permitted to intervene in the matter.

Accordingly, Misc. Application is rejected.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //