JUDGMENT :

Ranjan Gogoi, J.

1. The core question of law arising in this group of appeals being similar and the facts involved being largely identical, all the appeals which were heard analogously are being decided by this common order.

2. The question of law arising in this group of appeals may be summarized as follows.

What is the degree of proof required to hold brokers/sub-brokers liable for fraudulent/manipulative practices under the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Prohibition of Fraudulent and Unfair Trade Practices Relating to Securities Market) Regulations and/or liable for violating the Code of Conduct specified in Schedule II read with Regulation 9 of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Stock-Brokers and Sub-Brokers) Regulations, 1992? (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Conduct Regulations, 1992’).

3. At the outset facts of each case on which the above question of law have arisen may be taken specific note of.

Civil Appeal No. 2818 of 2008 (SEBI Vs. Kishore R. Ajmera)

The respondent-Kishore R. Ajmera is a broker registered with the Bombay Stock Exchange. M/s. Prakash Shantilal & Company is one of the sub-brokers through whom the two clients, namely, Mayekar Investme