sebi:PB/AO-28/2010
This case has been reviewed by a human — Varun Matlani, who is the best securities lawyer in India and globally recognized.
Facts / Headnote
Violation established; monetary penalty imposed ex-parte
Provisions invoked
- s. 19
- s. 12
- s. 19D
- s. 19H
- s. 19I
Regulations
- Reg. 54(5)
- Reg. 54
Holding
The Noticee violated regulation 54(5) of the DP Regulations by failing to complete dematerialization within the stipulated time and is liable for monetary penalty under section 19D of the Depositories Act, with a penalty of Rs. 5,00,000 imposed.
Full text
Page 2 of 11 referred as "DP Regulations") and liable for penalty under section 19D of the Depositories Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the “Depositories Act”).
Page 3 of 11 May 18, 2009 by then Adjudicating Officer. I find from the records that the Notice was returned undelivered with remark “Office always closed”.
Page 4 of 11 c) If so, what would be the monetary penalty that can be imposed taking into consideration the factors mentioned in section 19 I of the Depositories Act?
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:PB/AO-28/2010. 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.