sebi:IVD/KSERA/AO/DRK/ASG/EAD3-24/2009
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 violations of PFUTP Regulations and Stock Brokers Regulations
Provisions invoked
- s. 15
- s. 15H
- s. 15J
Regulations
- Reg. 7
- Reg. 3
- Reg. 4(1)
Parties
- Shri Adolf Pinto
Holding
The noticee Shri Adolf Pinto, a stock broker, was found to have violated Regulation 4(1) and 4(2)(n) of the PFUTP Regulations and Clauses A(1) and A(3) of the Code of Conduct for Stock Brokers by executing synchronized/circular trades in the scrip of KSERA through his son and daughter. A total penalty of Rs. 3,00,000 was imposed (Rs. 2,00,000 under Section 15HA and Rs. 1,00,000 under Section 15HB of the SEBI Act).
Full text
Page 2 of 12 during the Investigation Period the price of the scrip opened at Rs. 83.00, reached period low of Rs. 79.90 on June 01, 2004, touched a high of Rs. 164.00 on October 28, 2004 and closed at Rs. 151.75 on October 29,
Page 3 of 12 Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘SEBI Act’), read with Rule 3 of Securities and Exchange Board of India (Procedure for Holding Inquiry and Imposing Penalties by Adjudicating Officer) Rules, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Adjudication Rules’) to inquire into and adjudge under Section 15HA and 15 HB of the SEBI Act, the violations of Regulation 4(1) & 4(2) (n) of SEBI (Prohibition of Fraudulent and Unfair Trade Practices Relating to Securities Market) Regulations, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘PFUTP Regulations’) and Clauses A(1) and A(3) of the code of conduct prescribed for Stock Brokers in Schedule II under Regulation 7 of SEBI (Stock Brokers and Sub-Brokers) Regulations, 1992 ( hereinafter referred to as ‘Stock Brokers Regulations’) alleged to have been committed by the noticee.
Page 4 of 12 8. The noticee submitted a reply to the SCN dated June 3, 2008 denying all the charges. He submitted that he had not traded at the opening bell or a few minutes of the opening bell but after substantial volume of trading had taken place in the scrip and that in such a case manipulative trade is impossible. He submitted that the matching of trades was a mere coincidence and that his trades were jobbing trades. He submitted that he had undertaken the alleged trades unknowingly, unwittingly and with no intent.
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:IVD/KSERA/AO/DRK/ASG/EAD3-24/2009. 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.