Sahara India Real Estate Corporation Limited And Another v. Union Of India And Others

Order

1. By our order dated 12-5-2011 (2013) 1 SCC 174, we directed SEBI to examine the question as to what is an “optionally fully convertible debenture” and the manner in which deposits are invited by Sahara India Real Estate Corporation Limited, pending the writ petition in the Allahabad High Court, being Writ Petition No. 11702(M/B) of 2010.

2. Pursuant to our order dated 12-5-2011 (2013) 1 SCC 174, SEBI has passed an order on 23-6-2011. We are of the view that keeping in mind the interest of the investors and the complex legal issues involved in this matter(s), including the issue of jurisdiction, the better option would be to give an opportunity to the petitioners herein to prefer an appeal under Section 15-T of the SEBI Act, which lies before the Securities Appellate Tribunal. The petitioners herein will prefer this appeal within a period of three weeks from today. Within that period, the petitioners undertake to withdraw the pending writ petition in the Allahabad High Court in view of the order which is being passed today.

3. We keep all contentions on both sides expressly open. We express no opinion on the merits of the case. The Tribunal will decide the matter uninfluenced by any observations made by the High Court in the interim order(s).

4. Mr Fali S. Nariman, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, on instructions, states that, pending the hearing and final disposal of the appeal by the Tribunal, the petitioners will not invite any further deposits. In view of the above statement of the learned Senior Counsel, the impugned order of SEBI will not be given effect to till the appeal is decided. Since important questions of law arise, which may recur repeatedly, we direct the Tribunal to dispose of the appeal within eight weeks from the date of its filing. We make it clear that in the appeal, which is proposed to be filed by the petitioners herein, the petitioners will make the Union of India (Ministry of Corporate Affairs) as a party-respondent, particularly in view of the fact that the question of jurisdiction of the Registrar of Companies under Section 55-A(c) also needs to be considered.

5. The special leave petitions are, accordingly, disposed of.