Statutory interest at 12% per annum on unpaid penalties arises from the expiry of the compliance period, reflecting SEBI's authority in recovery due under the Act.

JUDGMENT :

R. MAHADEVAN, J.

1. All these appeals are filed under Section 15Z of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992¹[Hereinafter referred to as “SEBI Act”] challenging the common judgment and order dated 29.09.2022²[For short, “the impugned order”] passed by the Securities Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai³[For short, “the Tribunal”], in Appeal Nos.626 to 628 of 2022 preferred by the appellants. By the impugned order, the Tribunal dismissed the challenge to the notices of attachment dated 23.06.2022 issued against the appellants.

FACTUAL MATRIX

2. According to the appellants, they are the promoter-directors of M/s. Brijlaxmi Leasing and Finance Limited, a company incorporated under the Companies Act and limited by shares, which is listed on the Bombay Stock Exchange and engaged in providing various financial services, including lending, loan syndication, advisory, and portfolio management, among others.

2.1. The company in the year 1995-96 went in to initial public offer for fully paid-up share capital of 56,48,500 shares of face value of Rs.10/- each. The fully paid up 5,64,85,000 shares of the company were split from Rs.10/- to Re.1 each from 30.06.2005.

2.2. While so, the respondent conducted examination of scrip of the company and found that the promoters and directors of the company purchased shares of the company on various dates between October 2012 and July 2013 in violation of the provisions of Regulation Nos.13(4) and 13(4A) read with 13(5) of the SEBI (Prohibition of Insider Trading) Regulations, 1992⁴[For short, “the PTI Regulations”].

2.3. Upon issuance of show cause notices, the Adjudicating Officer passed adjudication orders on 28.08.2014 under section 15-I of the SEBI Act read with Rule 5 of the SEBI Rules, 1995, imposing penalty on the appellants.

2.4. Challenging the aforesaid orders, the appellants by names Jaykishor Chaturvedi, Siddharth Jaykishor Chaturvedi, and Ankur Jaykishor Chaturvedi preferred appeals bearing Nos.435, 436 and 434 of 2014, respectively, before the Tribunal under Section 15E of the SEBI Act. Vide order dated 04.08.2015, the Tribunal dismissed these appeals. Aggrieved by the same, the appellants preferred further appeals bearing Civil Appeal Nos.14729, 14730, and 14728 of 2015, respectively, before this Court.

2.5. By a common judgment dated 28.02.2019 in C.A.No(s).11311 of 2013 etc. cases, a 3-Judge Bench of this Court disposed of all these appeals upholding the quantum of penalty imposed on the appellants.

2.6. Thereafter, the respondent through its Recovery Officer, Western Regional Office, issued demand notices dated 13.05.2022 directing the appellants to pay the penalties imposed by the Adjudicating Officer vide orders dated 28.08.2014 along with interest @ 12% p.a. from 28.08.2014 to 13.05.2022. However, the appellants failed to comply with the demand for payment issued by the respondent.

2.7. Consequently, the respondent issued notices of attachment of bank accounts on 23.06.2022, to the Principal Officer / Chairman & Managing Director /CEO of all Banks in India, ordering the following attachment with immediate effect:

(a) All account/s by whatever name called including lockers of the Defaulter (appellants), either singly or jointly with any other person/s held with the Bank.

(b) All other amount/ proceeds due or may become due to the Defaulter (appellants) or any money held or may subsequently hold for or on account of the Defaulter (appellants).

2.8. The Respondent also issued notices of attachment of demat accounts on 23.06.2022 to National Securities Depository Ltd. and Central Depository Services (I) Ltd., ordering the following attachment with immediate effect:

(a) All Demat account/s by whatever name called of the Defaulter, e