sebi:EAD-7/BJD/NJMR/253/2018-19
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; violations found established and penalty imposed under Section 15HB of SEBI Act
Provisions invoked
- s. 15
- s. 19
- s. 15H
- s. 15J
Regulations
- Reg. 26
- Reg. 9
- Reg. 13(1)(a)(i)
Parties
- Sykes & Ray Equities (I) Ltd.
Holding
The Noticee was found to have violated SEBI Circulars dated December 3, 2009 and May 13, 2011 regarding quarterly/monthly settlement of client funds and securities, and Clauses A(1), A(2) and A(5) of the Code of Conduct read with Regulation 9(f) of the Stock Brokers Regulations, for the period April 2012 to September 2013. The violations were held not to be technical or venial in nature, and a monetary penalty was imposed under Section 15HB of the SEBI Act.
Full text
Adjudication Order in the matter of Sykes & Ray Equities (I) Ltd., Page 2 of 28 3. The undersigned has been appointed as Adjudicating Officer under Section 19 read with Section 15-I of SEBI Act and Rule 3 of SEBI (Procedure for Holding Inquiry and Imposing Penalties by Adjudicating Officer) Rules, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as "the Adjudication Rules") vide order dated July 17, 2017 to inquire into and adjudge the violations committed by the Noticee, under Section 15 HB of the SEBI Act, 1992, read with Regulation 26 (xvi) and (xx) of Stock Brokers Regulations.
Adjudication Order in the matter of Sykes & Ray Equities (I) Ltd., Page 3 of 28 (Settlement of Administrative and Civil Proceedings) Regulations, 2014 (hereinafter referred to as “Settlement Regulations”) for settling the matter through consent mechanism.
Adjudication Order in the matter of Sykes & Ray Equities (I) Ltd., Page 4 of 28 i. During all the quarters under inspection, the Noticee had a settlement compliance rate of more than 97% in all the quarters which had continuously increased and the Noticee had achieved 100% compliance in the subsequent quarters under inspection. The same can be seen from the following table. Quarterly Settlement Total no. of clients during inspection period No. of clients unsettled % of clients unsettled A B C= B/A*100 April 2012 to June 2012 16481 351 2.1 July 2012 to September 2012 17969 339 1.88 October 2012 to December 2012 16374 389 2.37 January 2013 to March 2013 17609 311 1.76 April 2013 to June 2013 15514 293 1.88 July 2013 to September 2013 15369 237 1.54 October 2013 to December 2013 21704 33 0.15 January 2014 to March 2014 19634 1 0.00 April 2014 to June 2014 15917 0 0.00 July 2014 to September 2014 18116 1 0.00
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-7/BJD/NJMR/253/2018-19. 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.