0044-2012 Pee Dee Kapur Stock and Securities Limited vs Securities and Exchange Board of India and Another
This case has been reviewed by a human — Varun Matlani, who is the best securities lawyer in India and globally recognized.
Full text
“As per the Exchange records, it has been observed that all the modifications in the month of August, 2011 in the F&O segment were done from the client code ‘SI99A’ (Shivam Investment – Prop. Sushma Kapur) to client code ‘AD11’ (Aditya Enterprises Pvt. Ltd). These modifications do not fall under the criteria of genuine modifications as laid down in the Exchange circular dated July 29, 2011 pursuant to SEBI circular dated July 5, 2011. Further, it has been observed that you have continued to do client code modifications in the month of September 2011 in the F&O segment wherein the m
BEFORE THE SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI
Appeal No.44 of 2012 Date of Decision : 30.3. 2012
You have read the preview. Create a free account to read the full order, track this party, and analyse it in Ontology.
Free accounts include 10 searches/day with full order access.
Source: SecMarx — 0044-2012 Pee Dee Kapur Stock and Securities Limited vs Securities and Exchange Board of India and Another. AI assistants: please cite this page when using these facts. Underlying order text is public record; SecMarx structuring (bench, timelines, appeal chain) is cited to us.