sebi:VSS/AO-179/2009
This case has been reviewed by a human — Varun Matlani, who is the best securities lawyer in India and globally recognized.
Facts / Headnote
Violations established; penalty imposed
Provisions invoked
- s. 15
- s. 15H
- s. 15J
Regulations
- Reg. 7
- Reg. 199
- Reg. 3
- Reg. 2
- Reg. 4(2)(a)
- Reg. 4(2)(e)
- Reg. 4(2)(g)
- Reg. 4(2)(b)
- Reg. 4(2)(o)
Parties
- Galaxy Broking Ltd
Holding
The Noticee, Galaxy Broking Ltd, was held to have violated Regulations 3, 4(1), 4(2)(a), (b), (e), (g) and (o) of the PFUTP Regulations and Clauses A(1), (2), (3), (4) and B(4)(a) of the Code of Conduct for Stock Brokers, and was imposed a total penalty of Rs. 25,000 (Rs. 20,000 under section 15HA and Rs. 5,000 under section 15HB of the SEBI Act).
Full text
Page 2 of 11 2. It was alleged that one of the broker, Galaxy Broking Ltd (hereinafter referred to as “Noticee”/“Broker”) executed trade of 16% of the total volume in the scrip of ML at the BSE during the period under investigation and violated the provisions of Regulation 3, 4(1), 4(2)(a), (b), (e), (g) and (o) of SEBI (Prohibition of Fraudulent and Unfair Trade Practices Relating to Securities Markets) Regulations, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as “PFUTP”) and Clauses A(1), (2), (3), (4), and B(4)(a) of Code of Conduct for Stock Brokers as specified in Schedule II under Regulation 7 of SEBI (Stock Brokers and Sub Brokers) Regulations 1992(hereinafter referred to as “Brokers Regulations”) and therefore is liable for monetary penalty under section 15 HA and 15HB of Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 (hereinafter referred to as “SEBI Act”).
Page 3 of 11 client by the name of Shiv Shah Troop Trac Electrodes Pvt Ltd (hereinafter referred to as “SSTTEPL”). The Noticee furnished details of the scrip wise summary of transactions of Troop Trac Electrodes Pvt Ltd (hereinafter referred to as “TTEPL/Client”). It further stated that the transactions for purchase and sell of 4933 shares as alleged to have been executed in the account of TTEPL was a technical mistake and further the Noticee was not aware that there were 137 counter party clients of buy trades and 129 clients for sell trade of TTEPL at that relevant time.
Page 4 of 11 CONSIDERATION OF ISSUES AND FINDINGS 6. The error in the name of the client having been corrected and the Noticee having agreed for the correction and expressed its willingness to proceed with the adjudication proceedings, the issues that arise for consideration in the present case are : a) Whether the Noticee had violated regulations 3, 4(1), 4(2)(a), (b), (e), (g) and (o) of PFUTP and Clauses A(1), (2), (3), (4), and B(4)(a) of Brokers Regulation? b) Does the violation, if any, on the part of the Noticee attract monetary
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:VSS/AO-179/2009. 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.