Misc. Application No. 95 of 2014 and Appeal No. 237 of 2014. Case: Rishiraj Agarwal Vs Securities and Exchange Board of India. Securities and Exchange Board of India
| Case Number | Misc. Application No. 95 of 2014 and Appeal No. 237 of 2014 |
| Counsel | For Appellant: Ramesh Mishra, Practicing Company Secretary and For Respondents: Mihir Mody, Advocate |
| Judges | J.P. Devadhar, J. (Presiding Officer) and A.S. Lamba, Member |
| Issue | Securities And Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 - Section 15A(b) |
| Judgement Date | September 02, 2014 |
| Court | Securities and Exchange Board of India |
Judgment:
J.P. Devadhar, J. (Presiding Officer)
Misc. Application No. 95 of 2014:
-
This miscellaneous application is filed seeking condonation of delay of 15 days in filing this appeal. For the reasons stated in miscellaneous application, delay is condoned. Miscellaneous application stands disposed of accordingly.
Appeal No. 237 of 2014:
-
Appellants are aggrieved by the adjudication order dated April 30, 2014 whereby penalty of ` 4 lac has been imposed upon appellants jointly and severally for violating Regulation 30(2) read with 30(3) of Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations, 2011 (SAST Regulations, 2011 for short).
-
Counsel for appellants fairly state that due date for making disclosures to the stock exchange in respect of open offer made by the appellants was April 12, 2012, however, disclosures, were actually made on May 14, 2012. As a result there is delay of 31 days in making the disclosures. Counsel for appellants submitted that for the aforesaid imposition of penalty of ` 4 lac is arbitrary and excessive, because, appellants had made disclosures to the target company i.e. Greenearth Resources and Projects Ltd. within the stipulated time, however, very same disclosures were inadvertently forwarded to the target company instead of forwarding it to the stock exchange and the promoters were under the wrong impression that the disclosures were duly filed with the stock exchange.
-
Obligation to make disclosures under Regulation 30(2) is mandatory and under Regulation 30(3) the promoters are obliged to make disclosure to the stock exchanges where the shares of the target company are listed and also to the target company. Even though it is claimed that the disclosures intended to be sent to the stock exchange were inadvertently sent to the target company, fact remains that there is delay in making disclosures to the stock exchange.
-
Once it is submitted that there...
To continue reading
Request your trial