sebi:EAD/KS/AA/AO/32/2017-18
This case has been reviewed by a human — Varun Matlani, who is the best securities lawyer in India and globally recognized.
Facts / Headnote
Penalty imposed on the Noticee for failure to redress investor complaint within the time specified
Provisions invoked
- s. 15A
- s. 15
- s. 15J
- s. 15F
- s. 15C
- s. 235
- s. 155
- s. 164
Regulations
- Reg. 15
- Reg. 14
- Reg. 14(3)
Parties
- Sinclairs Hotels Limited
Holding
The Adjudicating Officer held that Sinclairs Hotels Limited failed to submit ATR within 30 days of receipt of the complaint and failed to resolve the complaint in accordance with SEBI Circular CIR/OIAE/1/2014 dated December 18, 2014, and imposed a penalty of Rs. 4,00,000 under Section 15C of the SEBI Act.
Full text
Page 2 of 24 2. SEBI observed that Sinclairs Hotels Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'the Noticee / the Company/SHL’) had failed to redress one investor complaint having SCORES registration no. SEBIP/WB14/0000653/1 pending against it regarding issue of new shares certificates incorporating the new name of the company and has allegedly violated the provisions of Section 15C of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 (hereinafter referred to as 'SEBI Act').
Page 3 of 24 no. SEBIP/WB14/0000653/1. The said complaint was forwarded to SHL on the same date in SCORES for necessary redressal. (b) As per the Action History of SCORES, the Noticee has submitted the ATR only on January 09, 2015. It was alleged in the SCN that the Noticee has failed to submit ATR within 30 days of date of receipt of the complaint and also failed to resolve the complaint in accordance with the SEBI Circular no CIR/OIAE/1/2014 dated December 18, 2014.
Page 4 of 24 that there was an initial delay in reply to his complaint. We had kept SEBI informed about the same. (c) After examining the records of the company, it was informed to Mr Sabyasachi Dasgupta vide our letter dated 12.01.2015 sent to him by registered post that the subject shares were already dematerialised and his claim of ownership of those 4700 shares were incorrect and accordingly the said share certificates were cancelled. Thereafter, we again received a letter dated 16.03.2015 from him and our reply sent to him vide our letter dated 17.04.2015 (by Speed Post) reiterated our earlier stand. Copies of our reply and evidence of dispatch of these letters by the company to the complainant were duly submitted to SEBI. (d) You will kindly note that from the action history in terms of Annexure C of your show cause notice that the company has always been responsive to the complaint uploaded on SCORES. To this effect, we had submitted our reply on 09.01.2015, 14.01.2015, 20.04.2015, 29.05.2015, 22.09.2015, 08.10.2015, 31.03.2016 and 18.05.2016. (e) It is evident that the complainant, Mr Sabyasachi Dasgupta after receiving our reply vide letter dated 17.04.2015 did not pursue the matter any further leading us to believe that he has accepted our reply. Accordingly, vide our last reply posted on 18.05.2016, we had requested SEBI to please treat the complaint as closed. (f) We would respectfully submit that the company has been pro-active in replying to the issues raised in
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/KS/AA/AO/32/2017-18. 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.