sebi:OIAE/VCL/AO/DRK-CS/EAD-3/559/103-14
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. 1,00,000 imposed under Section 15A(a) for failure to obtain SCORES authentication and non-submission of action taken report; allegation of non-redressal of investor grievances not established
Provisions invoked
- s. 15A
- s. 15
- s. 15J
- s. 15C
Parties
- Vipras Corporation Ltd.
Holding
The Adjudicating Officer imposed a penalty of Rs. 1,00,000 on the Noticee under Section 15A(a) of the SEBI Act for failure to activate/obtain SCORES authentication and non-submission of action taken report, while holding that the allegation of non-redressal of investor complaints was not established.
Full text
Page 2 of 6 why an inquiry should not be held against the Noticee and why penalty, if any, should not be imposed on the Noticee under Section 15 A(a) and Section 15C of the SEBI Act for the non-redressal of investor grievances inspite of being called upon by SEBI in writting to do so. In the said SCN, it was alleged that "Noticee was informed vide letter dated February 15, 2013 that five investor complaints were pending against it and was advised to take appropriate necessary steps within 7 days of receipt of complaint by the company through SCORES, so as to resolve the complaint within 30 days of the receipt of the complaint and also keep the complainant informed of the action taken thereon. It was also informed that SEBI vide circular no. CIR/OIAE/2/2011 dated June 03, 2011 stipulated that all listed companies shall view the complaints pending against them and submit Action Taken Report (ATR) in SCORES failing which shall be treated as non- redressal of the investor grievance by the company. The said letter also mentioned that the Noticee had not obtained/ activated the SCORES authentication as required under the SEBI circular no. CIR/OIAE/1/2012 dated August 13, 2012. It was further mentioned that the Noticee neither viewed the grievances nor took any measure to resolve them. Thus, vide the aforesaid letter Noticee was directed to resolve all the grievances latest by February 27, 2013'.
Page 3 of 6 vide its reply dated November 15, 2013, undertaken to submit its detailed reply along with copy of letters written to the complainants including proof of dispatch/ delivery of the same within ten days.
Page 4 of 6 submitted the copy of the order of the Consumer forum, Mumbai, wherein the forum has dismissed the complaint. With respect to complaints of Mr. Navinchandra D shah & Mr. Mohd Badiuzzama, Noticee has stated that they have never declared any dividend, hence question of non-receipt of dividend does not arise. With respect to complaints of MD Kamrujjama, Noticee has stated that as per their record they have no pending shares transfer or transmission.
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/VCL/AO/DRK-CS/EAD-3/559/103-14. 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.