sebi:AO/SBM/EAD-1/315/2018
This case has been reviewed by a human — Varun Matlani, who is the best securities lawyer in India and globally recognized.
Facts / Headnote
Proceedings disposed of; no penalty imposed
Provisions invoked
- s. 21
- s. 23
- s. 23A
Parties
- Shri Shanti Lal Baid
Holding
The Adjudicating Officer held that Section 23A(a) of SCRA cannot be invoked as the penal provision for a violation of Clause 49 of the Equity Listing Agreement, and accordingly disposed of the adjudication proceedings against the Noticee without imposing any penalty.
Full text
Page 2 of 7 wide fluctuations. Based on the findings of the preliminary investigation, Whole Time Member, SEBI had passed an ad interim, ex-parte order dated December 28, 2011 (hereinafter referred to as ‘interim order’) in the matter of IPO of RDB against 19 entities.
Page 3 of 7 held against him and why penalty, if any, should not be imposed on him under Section 23A(a) of SCRA. 6. In the SCN, it was alleged that the Audit Committee meeting of RDB, which was held on October 07, 2011 was chaired by a Whole Time Director, in place of an Independent Director, in spite of the presence of Shri Mahendra Pratap Singh who is an Independent Director of RDB, which led to the violation of Clause 49 of the Equity Listing Agreement read with Section 21 of SCRA by the Noticee.
Page 4 of 7 ARs stated that no investor complaint has been received by the company and there is no pending complaints against RDB.
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 — sebi:AO/SBM/EAD-1/315/2018. 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.