sebi:EAD/BJD/NJMR/164-166/2017-18
This case has been reviewed by a human — Varun Matlani, who is the best securities lawyer in India and globally recognized.
Facts / Headnote
Violation established; monetary penalty of Rs 2,00,000 each imposed on three noticees
Provisions invoked
- s. 15A
- s. 15
- s. 15I
- s. 15J
Regulations
- Reg. 4
- Reg. 13
- Reg. 3
- Reg. 10
- Reg. 29
- Reg. 2
- Reg. 58
Parties
- Bharat Patel
- Minal Patel
- PAT Financial Consultants Pvt. Ltd.
Holding
The Adjudicating Officer held that Bharat Patel, Minal Patel and PAT Financial Consultants Pvt. Ltd. violated Regulation 13(1), 13(3), 13(4) read with 13(5) of SEBI (PIT) Regulations and Regulation 29(1) and 29(2) of SEBI (SAST) Regulations by failing to disclose changes in shareholding, and imposed a monetary penalty of Rs 2,00,000 on each noticee under Section 15A(b) of the SEBI Act.
Full text
Adjudication Order in the matter of Jyoti Ltd., Page 2 of 22 the necessary disclosures in terms of the provisions of SEBI (PIT) Regulations and SEBI (SAST) Regulations. Therefore, it was alleged that the Noticee-1 i.e., Bharat Patel had violated the provisions of Regulation 13 (1), 13 (3), 13(4) read with Regulation 13 (5) of SEBI (PIT) Regulations, 1992 and Regulation 29 (1) and 29 (2) of SEBI (SAST) Regulations, 2011. It was also alleged that the Noticee-2 and 3 Minal Patel and PAT Financial Consultants Pvt., Ltd., had violated the provisions of Regulation 13 (1), 13 (3) read with Regulation 13 (5) of SEBI (PIT) Regulations, 1992 and Regulation 29 (1) and 29 (2) of SEBI (SAST) Regulations, 2011
Adjudication Order in the matter of Jyoti Ltd., Page 3 of 22 (a) It was observed that as on April 1, 2013 Bharat Patel was holding 1,21,074 shares in his demat account number IN30015910517046 and 13,35,834 shares along with Minal Patel (first holder) in the demat account number INS30015910564804. It was observed that on April 17, 2013, Minal Patel and Bharat Patel had transferred 13,35,834 shares from their joint demat account to the demat account of Bharat Patel bearing number
Adjudication Order in the matter of Jyoti Ltd., Page 4 of 22 observed that the aforesaid transaction triggered disclosure requirement under Regulation 13 (3) of PIT Regulations and Regulation 29 (2) of SAST Regulations.
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:EAD/BJD/NJMR/164-166/2017-18. 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.