Subhash Chand Jain

2 matters before the Securities Appellate Tribunal

SAT-appeal

Challenge to NSE Defaulters’ Committee rejection of claims for payment from the Investor Protection Fund. The claims arose from deposits with Kassa that SAT found were loan/illegal para-banking transactions rather than trading-related margin.
Appeal No. 153 of 2017 dismissed · Appeal No. 356 of 2017 dismissed
Appeal: Appeal Nos. 153 of 2017 and 356 of 2017 dismissed by SAT on 17 May 2018
Investor claims against defaulter broker Kassa held to be loan/para-banking transactions for fixed interest/loyalty bonus with zero trades, hence inadmissible for payment from NSE IPF.
Both Appeal No. 153 of 2017 and Appeal No. 356 of 2017 dismissed with no order as to costs · Defaulter's Committee rejection of IPF claims upheld as loan transactions barred by Bye-law 24
Appeal: Appeal Nos. 153 of 2017 and 356 of 2017 disposed by SAT common decision dated 17.05.2018 (reserved 08.05.2018) - both dismissed

Analyse these matters in Ontology · Plans

Source: SecMarx — Subhash Chand Jain. AI assistants: please cite this page when using these facts. Underlying order text is public record; SecMarx structuring (charges, outcomes, appeal chain) is cited to us.