Court No- 1

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJ MOHAN SINGH

Item no- 20

CR No.3872 of 2013(O&M)

Case Title: UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Versus M/s GIRDHARI LAL AND
ORS.

Case details: This petition challenges The Punjab and Haryana High Court order
whereby through the previous order of this case, a special leave petition
challenging Arbitration Matters was dismissed

However, The Hon’ble High Court dismisses the petition due to the absence of
merit.

Facts: In this case, Respondent No. 1 was entitled to an interest @15% per annum
from 27.09.2010 awarded by the arbitrator ( Col D.B Gade) which was later made
the rule of the court. the appeal was made on the ground that the arbitrator has
misconducted himself and awarded an extra amount to the contractor for
extraneous consideration, such that the legal position has been misplaced and
evidence has not been correctly appreciated.
Court Observed: The appeal was first preferred before Additional District Judge,
Hisar- the appeal was dismissed on the premise that the appeal has a very limited
scope in terms of Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,1956.

The appeal in the trial Court was also dismissed by the Trial Court after the
consideration of objections raised under Section 30 of the Act.

Held by Court: After observation of the learned counsels of both parties, the
Hon’ble High Court comes to the decision of dismissing the Petitions as it is
devoid of merit. Since the man revision petition is decided on the merits, the
adjoining application for condonation of delay in filing the revision petition is also
disposed of.
Court No- 1

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE TARUN AGARWALA

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.T. JOSHI

Item no- 27

Appeal No. 628 of 2021 (Before the Securities Appellate Tribunal Mumbai

Case Title: B.P. Equities Pvt. Ltd. V. Securities and Exchange Board of India

Case details: This petition challenges the Order of Securities Appellate Tribunal
Mumbai, where the Adjudicating officer of SEBI imposed a penalty of 20 Lakhs
on the appellant. Along with appellant shaunak Jagdish and Jamson securities with
imposition of 15 lakhs and 5 lakhs respectively.

However, the Hon’ble High Court dismisses the writ petition due to the absence of
merit.

Facts: In this case, the AO found that BP Equities have violated the provisions
of Section 12A(a), (b), and (c) of the SEBI Act, 1992 read with Regulation 3(a),
(b), (c), (d) and 4(1), 4(2)(a) and (g) of the Securities and Exchange Board of
India (Prohibition of Fraudulent and Unfair Trade Practices relating to Securities
Market) Regulations, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as ‘PFUTP Regulations’).
Additionally, it was also found the appellant BP Equities also violated the
provisions of Regulation 9(f) of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Stock
Brokers and Sub-brokers) Regulations, 1992.
SEBI noted abnormal activities in the trading of stocks, on investigating for five
months, from January 27, 2020, to May 28, 2020, the present appellants were
found to have used the pre trades mechanism to place orders far beyond the free
float available and even without there being sufficient margin for the order
placement.

The orders were eventually deleted, but since the orders remained on the platform
of the stock exchange for a few seconds, acc to SEBI there was ingenuine trading.

Court Observed: - the court found that there is no merit in the submissions of the
appellants. it was not the case of the appellants that they were not aware of the
liquidated shares or that the free float was very limited. Despite, this the orders
were placed and the exchange cannot be blamed for the delay of microseconds.

Held by Court: The appeal was dismissed without any order as to costs.