sebi:OIAE/EAD-3/AO/DRK-ASR/718/43-2015
This case has been reviewed by a human — Varun Matlani, who is the best securities lawyer in India and globally recognized.
Facts / Headnote
Penalty of Rs. 2,00,000 imposed under Section 15C of the SEBI Act
Provisions invoked
- s. 15
- s. 15J
- s. 15C
Parties
- Diamant Infrastructure Limited
Holding
The Noticee violated Section 15C of the SEBI Act by failing to redress the investor grievance within the prescribed time, and a penalty of Rs. 2,00,000 was imposed under Section 15C.
Full text
Page 2 of 7 the order of appointment of Adjudicating Officer was communicated vide communiqué dated May 21, 2013. SHOW CAUSE NOTICE, REPLY AND PERSONAL HEARING:
Page 3 of 7 served upon the Noticee on November 22, 2013 and enclosed proof of service of the same. 4. In response to the SCN, the Noticee vide its letter dated December 11, 2013 submitted its reply and made following submissions: a. The company has filed the ATR online with SEBI and also sent reply to the investor. b. The complaint made by Hora is pertaining to the Rights issue of the company. The matter was clarified by the company and the Registrar / Share Transfer Agent (hereinafter referred to as 'RTA') at the time of filing of complaint. The ATR was filed by the company on SCORES on timely basis. c. There are no complaints pending against the company. d. Noticee also provided copy of the letter dated October 30, 2009 sent by the RTA to Hora informing him that the Rights issue of the company was deferred and it is expected to open shortly. The RTA also stated in its aforesaid letter that due care will be taken to send the offer letter at the time of opening of Rights issue. e. Noticee also provided the copies of its letters dated May 16, 2011 and August 24, 2011 addressed to SEBI informing about the action taken by the company to redress the complaint of Hora.
Page 4 of 7 b. The delay in filing final reply to SCN was because of the fact that the registered office of the company was being shifted out of Mumbai to Nagpur. The SCN was received at Mumbai Office of the Noticee and it took some time to deliver it to Nagpur office. c. Company had filed ATR and also replied to the complainant before the receipt of SCN. d. With respect to the notice of hearing the company submitted that it has cleared the matter in timely manner and has always redressed the grievances of shareholders of the company.
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:OIAE/EAD-3/AO/DRK-ASR/718/43-2015. 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.