Appeal to Supreme Court
Section 15Z of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 deals with appeal to Supreme Court. Any person aggrieved by any decision or order of the Securities Appellate Tribunal may file an appeal to the Supreme Court within sixty days from the date of communication of the decision or order of the Securities Appellate Tribunal to him on any question of law arising out of such order: Provided The Act came into force on 30 Jan 1992.
1[15Z. Appeal to Supreme Court.--Any person aggrieved by any decision or order of the Securities Appellate Tribunal may file an appeal to the Supreme Court within sixty days from the date of communication of the decision or order of the Securities Appellate Tribunal to him on any question of law arising out of such order:
Provided that the Supreme Court may, if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal within the said period, allow it to be filed within a further period not exceeding sixty days.]]
Section 15Z, The Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 (Act 15 of 1992).
Cross-references
Extracted from the operative text of the enactments themselves. Every destination below exists in our corpus.
Referred to by 1
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
Magnum Equity Broking LTD vs Securities and Exchange Board of India
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The conditions stipulated in clauses (a), (b), and (c) of Section 15J of the SEBI Act, 1992 are illustrative in nature and not exhaustive. The Adjudicating Officer has discretion to consider circumstances beyond those enumerated in Section 15J while determining penalty quantum under Sections 15A to 15HA. Section 15J was never eclipsed by amendments to Sections 15A-15HA, and the Explanation added by Act No. 7 of 2017 clarified this legislative intent. The power to impose "such penalty as he thinks fit" under Section 15I(2) supports this discretionary approach. However, the imposition of penalty itself depends on satisfaction of substantive provisions in Sections 15A-15HA, not on satisfaction of Section 15J conditions.
On this section: Supreme Court's jurisdiction to review SEBI Appellate Tribunal orders; interpreted to limit Court's power to interfere with penalty quantum only where it is wholly arbitrary, harsh, or disproportionate to the violation.
-
Quantum Global Securities and Leasing Company LTD vs Securities and Exchange Board of India
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The conditions stipulated in clauses (a), (b) and (c) of Section 15J of the SEBI Act are illustrative in nature and not exhaustive. The Adjudicating Officer has discretion to consider other circumstances beyond those enumerated in Section 15J while determining the quantum of penalty under Sections 15A to 15HA. The power and discretion vested by Section 15J is not eclipsed by the penalty provisions in Sections 15A to 15HA, and the Explanation to Section 15J added by Act No. 7 of 2017 clarifies that the Adjudicating Officer shall have deemed to have always exercised this discretion in determining penalties. These provisions must be read harmoniously to avoid conflict and inconsistency.
On this section: Supreme Court's jurisdiction to hear appeals against orders of Securities Appellate Tribunal and to interfere only where penalty is wholly arbitrary and harsh
-
Union of India vs All Orissa Tax Bar Association
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The National Tax Tribunal Act, 2005, insofar as Sections 5, 6, 7, 8, and 13 are concerned, violates the basic structure of the Constitution by failing to ensure that a tribunal substituting High Court jurisdiction possesses the same standards, independence, security of tenure, and qualifications required for judges of the High Court. While Parliament has legislative competence to create tribunals and transfer appellate jurisdiction, such transfer must conform to recognized constitutional conventions derived from Westminster model constitutions and the principles of separation of powers, rule of law, and judicial independence which form part of the basic structure. Specific violations include: (1) locating tribunal sittings primarily in Delhi denies litigants accessibility; (2) vesting power over tribunal jurisdiction and member transfer with the Central Government (an interested party) compromises independence; (3) allowing non-legally qualified Accountant Members and Technical Members to decide substantial questions of law violates the requirement that tribunal members possess stature commensurate with High Court judges; (4) Selection Committee composition with government Secretaries violates principle that a party's opponent cannot select adjudicators; (5) five-year renewable terms encourage members to curry favor with government; (6) allowing Chartered Accountants and any authorized person to represent parties before a forum deciding only questions of law undermines the specialized nature of appellate adjudication. Consequently, the entire National Tax Tribunal Act is struck down as unconstitutional.
On this section: Appeal to Supreme Court on questions of law from appellate tribunal
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Questions about Section 15Z
What have the courts held on Section 15Z of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act?
Magnum Equity Broking LTD vs Securities and Exchange Board of India (28 Feb 2019) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: Supreme Court's jurisdiction to review SEBI Appellate Tribunal orders; interpreted to limit Court's power to interfere with penalty quantum only where it is wholly arbitrary, harsh, or disproportionate to the violation. Another 2 judgments on this section are set out below, all of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2014 to 2019.
How do I find court cases under Section 15Z of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: Sebi Act 15Z, section 15Z Sebi Act, section 15Z of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act. People searching for it also type section 15z of the securities and exchange board of india act 1992. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 3 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Magnum Equity Broking LTD vs Securities and Exchange Board of India (28 Feb 2019).
What should I read with Section 15Z of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, and has it changed?
1 other provision in this corpus refers back to it.
When did Section 15Z of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act come into force?
Section 15Z of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, cited as Sebi Act 15Z, came into force on 30 Jan 1992, having been enacted on 04 Apr 1992. It is in force as at the date shown on this page.
Other sections of this Act
- 11. Functions of Board1315 words
- 11C. Investigation1145 words
- 12. Registration of stock-brokers, sub-brokers, share transfer agents, etc678 words
- 28A. Recovery of amounts629 words
- 15U. Procedure and powers of the Securities Appellate Tribunal494 words
- 15D. Penalty for certain defaults in case of mutual funds464 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Text as in force on 15 Oct 2026. This page is not a substitute for legal advice.