Bombay High Court

Bombay HC: Unauthorized Trades by Mateen Lead to Brokerage Refund for Shashi Mehra HUF

Updated
Feb 4, 2026 3:24 PM
bombay-hc-unauthorized-trades-by-mateen-lead-to-brokerage-refund-for-shashi-mehra-huf

Quick Summary: The Bombay High Court decided in favor of Shashi Mehra HUF, telling Nirmal Bang Securities Pvt. Ltd. to give back all the brokerage money after trades done without permission led to big losses. The case was about trades made by someone not officially recognized, Mateen, who tricked Shashi Mehra HUF.

The Case Begins

On February 3, 2026, Judge Sandeep V. Marne of the Bombay High Court gave a decision about Nirmal Bang Securities Pvt. Ltd. and Shashi Mehra HUF. The case was about trades done without permission by Mateen, who lied about being an official representative of Nirmal Bang.

Unauthorized Trades and Huge Losses

Mateen, who wasn't officially recognized as a representative, talked Shashi Mehra into reopening an inactive trading account in April 2019. In a short time, trades worth over Rs. 1,000 crores were made, leading to big losses. Mehra said these trades were done without permission.

Findings of the IGRC and Tribunals

The Investor Grievance Redressal Committee (IGRC) and later groups that looked into the case found that even though Mehra wasn't careful, the trades were more about making brokerage money than real investments. The IGRC first said to give back 75% of the brokerage, which was later increased to 100% by another group.

Court's Decision

Judge Marne canceled the decisions of the other groups, saying the trades were allowed and the brokerage shouldn't be given back. The court pointed out that Shashi Mehra kept trading with Mateen even after seeing losses, which showed they allowed it.

Key Points from the Judgment

  • False Representation: Mateen lied about being an official representative, but his father was registered later.

  • Carelessness and Trust: The court noticed that Mehra was careless in trusting Mateen and not checking the account activities.

  • Rule Breaking: Even though there were mistakes in following rules, they didn't mean the brokerage should be refunded.

  • Fairness Principles: The judgment criticized the other groups for using fairness to give back brokerage without any contract or legal reason.

Verdict Summary

The court's decision shows how important it is to be careful and the limits of fairness in these cases. It also opens up the possibility of actions against Nirmal Bang for not following rules.

Tags:
Commercial Disputes
Securities Regulations
Investor Protection