2026:BHC-OS:3229 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ARBITRATION PETITION NO. 304 OF 2024 Nirmal Bang Securities Pvt. Ltd. …..PETITIONER : VERSUS :

Shashi Mehra HUF ….RESPONDENT Mr. Nikhil Sakhardande, Senior Advocate with Ms. Shubra Swami, Mr.

Samyak Pati, Ms. Valentine Mascarenhas and Ms. Janani Sitaraman i/b M/s.

RHP Partners for the Petitioner.

Mr. Deepak Dhane with Mr. Viraj Bhate and Ms. Jidnyasa Kamble i/b M/s.

Corporate Pleaders for the Respondent. CORAM : SANDEEP V. MARNE, J. JUDG. RESD. ON: 14 JANUARY 2026 JUDG. PRON. ON : 03 FEBRUARY 2026

JUDGMENT :

1) This is a petition filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act) challenging the Award of the Appellate Arbitral Tribunal of National Stock Exchange dismissing the Appeal preferred by the Petitioner and confirming the Award of the Arbitral Tribunal dated 14 October 2022. The Arbitral Tribunal, while dismissing the application preferred by the Petitioner, had allowed the application preferred by the Respondent and has directed refund of full brokerage amount by the Petitioner to the Respondent by modifying the order passed by the Investor Grievance Redressal Committee (IGRC) which had capped the refund of brokerage to only

75%.

FACTS

2) Petitioner is an incorporated entity and a stock broker with membership of National Stock Exchange of India Ltd (NSE) and Bombay Stock Exchange. Respondent is a Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) with Mr. Shashi Mehra, a practicing Chartered Accountant, being its Karta. Respondent had initially opened a demat account with the Petitioner in 2007, which had become inactive over sustained period of time. In April 2019, Respondent reactivated the account with the Petitioner. It appears that the reactivation of Respondent’s account was at the behest of one Mateen Attar (Mateen) Respondent claims that Mateen introduced himself as Authorised Person (AP) of the Petitioner and was accompanied by Mr. Bhaskar Shrivastava and Mr. Shishir Tiwari. It is Respondent’s case that Mateen introduced himself as having expertise and experience of handling assets of Rs.200 crores of high net worth investors at Petitioner’s HNI Desk.

3) Respondent signed the requisite forms for reactivation of his Trading Account, which had shares worth approximately Rs.1.40 crores. The shares were transferred in the new Demat Account with the Petitioner. It appears that Respondent handed over login ID and password of his trading account to Mateen, who commenced trading in the account of the Respondent in Equity/Capital Market (CM), Futures and Options (F&O) and Currency Derivative segments (CDS). According to the Petitioner, the first date of trading generated debit balance of Rs.4 crores in Respondent’s ledger accounts and Compliance Officer of the Petitioner made a telephonic call to the Respondent and sought confirmation of the trades. It appears that Respondent confirmed the trades. The Respondent was also warned not to share his user ID and password with any third party. The trading in the Respondent’s Account commenced on 25 April 2019 and continued upto 21 June 2019. It is Petitioner’s case that Respondent duly received SMS notifications on his registered mobile number, as well as electronic contract notes, ledger, margin statements and other documents on his registered email address in addition to independent intimations from the Exchange and the Depository regarding the trades effected in his account. It appears that Respondent did not object to the trades in question contemporaneously. The volume of trades effected by Mateen in the account of the Respondent was enormous, which is clear from the following table:

the following table:

the following table:

the following table:

the following table:

the following table:

the following table:

4) It later transpired that Mateen was not the AP of the Petitioner. However, during currency of transactions, Mateen’s father Mr. Rafeeqahmed Imamsab Attar was registered