This order of the appellate authority was challenged by SEBI before the bench comprising chief justice MB Shah. At the last hearing on September 28, the court had stayed certain observations made by the appellate authority regarding the powers of SEBI.

At that hearing, HLL's counsels had contended that even though the final order of the appellate authority had exonerated HLL, there were certain parts of the order which were adverse to the company. The bench had then asked HLL to file a separate petition if it felt aggrieved with the appellate authority order.

"We have filed a counter petition as directed by the bench as we are aggrieved by certain observations made in the appellate authority order,"said an HLL spokesperson.

The petition was filed last month. The appellate authority had held that HLL was an insider and the information available with it about the impending merger went beyond purely self-generated information arising out of its own decision making regarding the merger. It had also held that both HLL and Brooke Bond Lipton Ltd were interconnected.

The authority had also agreed that information of merger was price sensitive as held by SEBI. The authority had noted that there was enough evidence to suggest that the transaction of acquiring 8 lakh shares of BBLIL by HLL from UTI was motivated by knowledge of the impending merger.

However, in the final analysis the appellate authority had held that SEBI was not right in ordering prosecution against the company's directors.