Subrata Roy Sahara vs. Union Of India Ministry Of Home Affairs

ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.9 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Contempt Petition (Civil) No. 412 of 2012 in Civil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (With appln(s) for stay and office report) WITH Contempt Petition (Civil) No. 413 of 2012 in Civil Appeal No. 9833 of 2011 (With appln. for stay and office report) IA Nos. 68-69, 70-71 and 72-73 in CA No. 9813 of 2011 (With appln. for directions, appropriate orders and office report) Date: 08/05/2013 These Petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Mr. Purushottam Kr. Jha, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair, Adv. Mr. Debarshi Bhuvan, Adv. for M/s. K.J. John & Co. For Respondent(s) Mr. Ram Jethmalani, Sr. Adv. Mr. Satish Kishorchandani, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Jatin Pore, Adv. Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Parag, Adv. Mr. Samir Malik, Adv. Mr. Aditya Chopra, Adv. Mr. Mahesh Agarwal, Adv. for Mrs. Shally Bhasin Maheshwari, Adv. ...2/- : 2 : Mr. C.A. Sundaram, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Malhotra, Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R IA Nos. 68-69 of 2013 in CA No. 9813 of 2011 Application praying for filing additional documents is allowed. Heard counsel for either side. Due to paucity of time, it would not be possible for us to hear the contempt petition and the same stands adjourned to July 17, 2013 at 2.00 p.m.

Parties shall complete pleadings in all IAs/petitions before that date.

Mr. Arvind Datar, learned senior advocate appearing for the petitioner, submits that the money so far deposited by Saharas' be permitted to be refunded to the genuine investors, with interest, after verifying the genuineness of the documents. SEBI may do so. As far as genuine multiple investors are concerned, the issue be examined on the next date of hearing. Ordered accordingly.

|(N.S.K. Kamesh) | |(Renuka Sadana)

| |Court Master | |Court Master |