sebi:WTM/KMA/IVD/103/07/2009
This case has been reviewed by a human — Varun Matlani, who is the best securities lawyer in India and globally recognized.
Facts / Headnote
Confirmed the ex-parte interim order dated April 23, 2009 against Mr. Manilal Kotecha; restraint from dealing in securities to continue till completion of investigation
Provisions invoked
- s. 11B
- s. 11
- s. 11(4)
- s. 19
- s. 15I
- s. 12(3)
Regulations
- Reg. 11
- Reg. 3
Parties
- Mr. Manilal Kotecha
Holding
The ex-parte interim order dated April 23, 2009 restraining Mr. Manilal Kotecha from buying, selling or dealing in the securities market is confirmed and shall continue till completion of investigation.
Full text
Page 2 of 23 that they may file their objections, if any, within thirty days from the date of the said order and, if they so desire, avail of an opportunity of personal hearing.
Page 3 of 23 f. That none of the trades executed by him have been found to be in violation of rules/ regulations framed by SEBI including the SEBI (Prohibition of Fraudulent and Unfair Trade Practices Relating to Securities Market) Regulations, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as PFUTP Regulations) and that he had never bought and sold even a single share in the scrip of PSTL; g. That the power to look into suspicious banking transactions does not fall within the purview of SEBI; h. That he is a senior citizen aged about 85 years, now retired and that all through his working life he had been engaged in the business of working as a General Manager, United India Insurance Company; Also, that he has been a regular investor in the securities market and that after his retirement he had put in his savings in the securities market; i. That the order has not made a single finding showing what the suspicious banking transactions were and how the same were suspicious in nature. No allegation/averment/observation/finding or whisper thereof has been made by SEBI that the money withdrawn by him has been directly or indirectly been put in the securities market; j. That it has not been shown in the order as to what loss would have been caused to the securities market, if he was allowed to continue trading in the market or how the interest of the investor would be affected if he was not debarred with immediate effect; k. That an order of this nature, which is based merely on surmise and conject
Page 4 of 23 3. In view of his submissions/objections, Mr. Manilal Kotecha has requested that the said order to the extent it applied to him, be reconsidered and the
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/KMA/IVD/103/07/2009. 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.