sebi:SO/SM/HP/2020-21/6260
This case has been reviewed by a human — Varun Matlani, who is the best securities lawyer in India and globally recognized.
Facts / Headnote
Adjudication proceedings initiated against Mr. Avtar Singh disposed of pursuant to settlement on payment of Rs. 14,45,000/-
Regulations
- Reg. 25
- Reg. 28
- Reg. 23
- Reg. 4(2)
- Reg. 30(4)(i)
- Reg. 30(5)
- Reg. 30(9)
Parties
- Mr. Avtar Singh
Holding
The adjudication proceedings initiated against Mr. Avtar Singh by SCN ref. no. SEBI/EAD/AA/KL/10923/2020 dated June 10, 2020, for alleged violations of Regulation 30(4)(i), 30(5) and 30(9) of LODR Regulations, are disposed of pursuant to a settlement order on payment of Rs. 14,45,000/-.
Full text
Page 2 of 4 shareholding in step-down subsidiary company viz. SQ and related details. However, it is alleged that PCCPL had not disclosed about the outstanding debt (liabilities) of the aforementioned two subsidiary companies, which arose from the default of a settlement agreement. The aforementioned settlement agreement was in respect of sale of SQ and was entered into between the Noticee, SD and STS, erstwhile shareholders of SQ and the Purchasers. b) Further, it is observed that as per the materiality policy of PCCPL, board of directors of PCCPL had designated Mr. Shalil S Shroff (Managing Director of PCCPL) and Mr. Avtar Singh (Noticee) as key managerial personnel and authorized them to determine materiality of an event or information for the purpose of making disclosures to the stock exchanges as required under Reg. 30(5) of LODR Regulations. However, while determining materiality of the current event, they have allegedly not considered the criteria stipulated in Reg. 30(4)(i) of LODR Regulations. c) Further, as per Reg. 30(9) of LODR Regulations, a listed entity shall disclose all events / information related to its subsidiaries which are material for the listed entity. In the current context, it is alleged that PCCPL was aware of the fact that there was a default in payment by the Purchasers to the erstwhile shareholders and thus, the debt was devolved on SD and STS, but had failed to disclose the same to the Stock Exchanges. d) Therefore, in view of the above discussi
Page 3 of 4 Internal Committee on Consent (hereinafter referred to as ‘IC’) on December 17, 2020 and December 28, 2020. During the aforesaid meetings, the settlement terms of Rs. 14,45,000/- (Rupees Fourteen Lakh Forty-Five Thousand only) as settlement amount towards the alleged violations of the provisions of LODR Regulations, as discussed above, was communicated to the ARs of the applicant. It is noted that the subject settlement application was filed by the applicant beyond the 60-day period from the date of service of the SCN. Therefore, as per Regulation 4(2) of the Settlement Regulations, the settlement amount as proposed in the settlement terms shall be increased by 25%, in view of the aforementioned delay. However, the applicant requested that the 25% increase in the settlement amount be condoned off in view of the Covid-19 pandemic and quoted the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in suo- moto writ petition (Civil) No. 3 of 2020, wherein the Hon’ble SC has suspended the limitation period under general laws and special laws. The applicant vide his letter dated January 06, 2021, proposed the payment of Rs. 14,45,000/- (Rupees Fourteen Lakh Forty-Five Thousand only) towards full and final settlement of all regulatory, civil or criminal proceedings in relation to the facts contained in the SCN without admitting or denying any violation on his part.
Page 4 of 4 towards the settlement terms had been transferred via online payment (RTGS) to SEBI bearing UTR number HDFCR52021030178729537 dated March 01, 2021, and also submitted the transaction details of the same. Further, the receipt of the abovementioned amount was confirmed by the concerned department of SEBI on March 09, 2021.
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:SO/SM/HP/2020-21/6260. 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.