“Further, the issue raised by the Appellant regarding the ……is a matter of grievance which cannot be adjudicated as far as mandate of RTI Act is concerned.”: SEBI, Part 3.

  1. Have any one even heard about any enhanced exposure charges, charged by any TM for which this TM has filled the suite? How funny is this that the NSE is closing all the complaint of the Investors on this bogus point?
  2. When The TM has not filed any suit about my complaint related to the unauthorized trades/ square off of the position without any intimations and the excess brokerage charged than that of the agreed rate/KYC. Further the TM’s suit has nothing to do with my complaint. Then how my matter becomes sub judice?
  3. Why my matter has been closed when No court has granted any type of stay order of any nature whatsoever against my complaint?
  4. Why the NSE/SEBI to close my complaint without any court and why I was not allowed to use my right to refer the dispute with the ISC of NSE and/or SCORE of SEBI.
  5. Why my complaint has been closed when the resolution of the relevant dispute is exclusively in the domain of the NSE/SEBI and no civil court can intervene in such proceeding? Mere filing of a civil suit cannot be a bar to the proceedings for redress before the NSE.
  6. It is the established law that any disputes if any will be referred to the Arbitration Mechanism of the NSE/SEBI. Why I was not allowed to use this right?
  7. It is found that the TM used to file some Civil Suites for some other issues (not related to the complaint but on different issue) in the civil court against the investors and based on that the NSE used to closed the matter just mare on the request of the TM, without giving any chance to the investors to submit his point of view. The NSE also ignores the investors request for referring the matter to the IGRP, Why?

The respondent, in response to all the above queries, observed that the same are in the nature of seeking clarification/opinion and accordingly, cannot be construed as “information” as defined under section 2(f) of the RTI Act. The respondent also observed that the query numbers 2, 3, 5, 6, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22 and 23, are directed towards Exchange or Trading Member.

Click here to read the entire order.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Open chat