sebi:WTM/GM/EFD/52/2017-18
This case has been reviewed by a human — Varun Matlani, who is the best securities lawyer in India and globally recognized.
Facts / Headnote
SBEPL and its 7 present and past directors/promoters held liable for unregistered CIS and directed jointly and severally to wind up schemes and refund with returns within three months, with restraint from securities market and alienation of assets; PFUTP charge dropped.
Provisions invoked
- s. 11A
- s. 24
- s. 19
- s. 12
Regulations
- Reg. 65
- Reg. 3
- Reg. 4(2)
- Reg. 4(2)(t)
Parties
- Sunplant Bio Energy Private Limited
- Shri Awdhesh Kumar Singh
- Shri Girija Shankar Kumar
- Shri Sumanta Sinha
- Shri Neeraj Pathak
- Shri Sunil Kumar Jha
- Shri Subir Gupta
- Shri Padmalochan Nayak
Holding
Sunplant Bio Energy Private Limited and its present and past directors/promoters floated collective investment schemes without SEBI registration in violation of section 12(1B) read with section 11AA and Regulation 3 of the CIS Regulations, and were directed to wind up and refund with market restraints, while the Regulation 4(2)(t) PFUTP charge was dropped.
Full text
Page 2 of 9 Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 (“the SEBI Act”) read with Section 11AA of the SEBI Act, 1992 and Regulation 3 of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Collective Investment Schemes) Regulations, 1999 (“the CIS Regulations”). The noticees were also alleged to have contravened regulation 4(2)(t) of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Prohibition of Fraudulent and Unfair Trade Practice Relating to Securities Market) Regulations, 2003 (“the PFUTP Regulations”), which was brought into effect from September 06, 2013.
Page 3 of 9 iii. Directing them to refrain from accessing the securities market and prohibiting them from buying, selling or otherwise dealing in securities for an appropriate period.
Page 4 of 9 8. An opportunity of personal hearing was granted to all the noticees in order to comply with the principles of natural justice and the same was scheduled on May 22, 2017. Notice regarding the said personal hearing was published by SEBI on April 28, 2017 through Kolkata Edition of The Statesman (English) and Anand Bazar Patrika (Bengali) in respect the noticee nos. 1, 2, 4, 5 & 7. Similarly, in respect of noticee no. 8, publication of notice was done on April 28, 2017 in Bhubaneswar and Balasore Editions of Times of India (English) and Dhwani Pratidhwani (Odiya) respectively. In respect of noticee nos. 3 & 6, the newspaper publication was carried out on April 28, 2017 in the Patna Edition of Times of India (English) and Hindustan (Hindi). However, even after the service of notice effected through newspaper publications, none of the noticees appeared for the hearing nor submitted any reply or sought any extension of time. In view of the same, I am convinced that sufficient opportunities have been granted to the noticees and they are not keen to avail the same. I further note that except the noticee nos. 2 & 3, none of the noticees has filed any written reply/submission to the interim order-cum-SCN. In view of these facts and circumstances, I deem it appropriate to decide the matter ex-parte on the basis of material available on record, in respect of noticee nos. 1 & 4-8. In respect of the noticee nos. 2 & 3, the submissions made by them have been considered along w
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:WTM/GM/EFD/52/2017-18. 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.