sebi:Order/GR/RK/2020-21/10089
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 violation of Regulations 29(2) read with 29(3) of SAST Regulations, 2011
Provisions invoked
- s. 15A
- s. 15
- s. 19
- s. 15J
- s. 15F
- s. 28A
Regulations
- Reg. 29(2)
- Reg. 29(3)
- Reg. 201
Parties
- Fortis Healthcare Holdings Pvt. Ltd.
Holding
The Noticee, Fortis Healthcare Holdings Pvt. Ltd., violated Regulations 29(2) read with 29(3) of the SAST Regulations, 2011 by failing to make timely disclosures in the prescribed format regarding a change in promoter shareholding exceeding 2%, and was liable to a penalty of Rs 1,00,000 under Section 15A(b) of the SEBI Act.
Full text
Adjudication Order in respect of Fortis Healthcare Holdings Pvt. Ltd. Page 2 of 12 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Noticee’) were observed by SEBI. Accordingly, it was alleged that the Noticee had violated the provisions of Regulations 29(2) read with 29(3) of SAST Regulations, 2011.
Adjudication Order in respect of Fortis Healthcare Holdings Pvt. Ltd. Page 3 of 12 4. In response to this, the Noticee vide its letter dated November 17, 2020 requested to keep the proceedings on hold as both the promoters of the Noticee has been sent to judicial custody since October 10, 2019. Further, vide the same letter, the Noticee requested to be provided with copy of several documents including copy of order appointing Adjudicating Officer, copy of SEBI’s internal delegation of powers and copy of investigation report prepared by SEBI.
Adjudication Order in respect of Fortis Healthcare Holdings Pvt. Ltd. Page 4 of 12 It is understood from the captioned SCN that FHHPL has indeed disclosed the change in shareholding that occurred owing to invocation of pledge on its shares and it is not SEBI’s contention that FHHPL has failed to disclose the change in its shareholding of Fortis Healthcare Limited (“FHL”). The only allegation against FHHPL appears to be that the format of disclosure was not in the manner specified under the SEBI (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations, 2011 (“SAST Regulations”). Subject to para 3 above and based on records, FHHPL denies having violated any law. Accordingly, it is requested that in view of due disclosure being made to the public and the investor being informed, the inquiry proceedings initiated against FHHPL be concluded without any further action.”
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:Order/GR/RK/2020-21/10089. 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.