sebi:EAD/SR/SM/AO/27/2018-19
This case has been reviewed by a human — Varun Matlani, who is the best securities lawyer in India and globally recognized.
Facts / Headnote
Show Cause Notice disposed of without imposition of any penalty
Provisions invoked
- s. 15
- s. 15H
- s. 15J
Regulations
- Reg. 7
- Reg. 3
- Reg. 4(1)
- Reg. 4(2)(a)
Parties
- MBL & Company Limited
Holding
The Adjudicating Officer held that the allegations of violations of regulations 4(1), 4(2)(a) and 4(2)(g) of the PFUTP Regulations, 2003 and clauses A(2), A(3), A(4) and A(5) of the Code of Conduct for Stock Brokers were not established against the Noticee, and disposed of the Show Cause Notice without imposing any penalty.
Full text
Adjudication Order in respect of MBL & Company Limited in the matter of Twilight Litaka Pharma Ltd Page 2 of 9 APPOINTMENT OF ADJUDICATING OFFICER
Adjudication Order in respect of MBL & Company Limited in the matter of Twilight Litaka Pharma Ltd Page 3 of 9 appearance of trading in the scrip of TLPL. It is alleged that during the investigation period, following self-trades were carried out by the Noticee:
Adjudication Order in respect of MBL & Company Limited in the matter of Twilight Litaka Pharma Ltd Page 4 of 9 d. The respective order of independent trader / dealer were entered in good faith for the purpose of executing bona-fide transaction without any pre-arrangement and knowledge of order of other dealers / trader. e. In screen based trading, the counter party always remain anonymous and thus the dealers are not aware of the counter party. Hence, it is difficult for the two dealers to act in sync with each other as they do not have any information or knowledge of placement of trades by the other dealer. f. The impugned self-trades had no impact on the securities market so as to disturb the market equilibrium or create false / misleading appearance of trading in the said scrip. g. The Indian regulators have themselves considered that self-trades per se are not illegal and that cross-trades do happen in the market in normal course of broking / intra-day/ jobbing activity. h. Mere occurrence of un-intentional self-trades can not be considered fraudulent. The SCN fails to bring any manipulative intent on the part of the Noticee. i. The Noticee cited certain Orders of SAT and other Adjudicating Officers in support of its contention and prayed for dropping of the said adjudication proceedings initiated against the Noticee.
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/SR/SM/AO/27/2018-19. 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.