sebi:WTM/KMA/IVD/190/12/2009
This case has been reviewed by a human — Varun Matlani, who is the best securities lawyer in India and globally recognized.
Facts / Headnote
Restrained Mr. J. R. Desai from accessing the securities market and prohibited from buying, selling or otherwise dealing in the securities market, either directly or indirectly, for a period of one year.
Provisions invoked
- s. 11B
- s. 19
Regulations
- Reg. 11
- Reg. 4
- Reg. 4(a)
Parties
- Mr. J. R. Desai
Holding
The noticee, Mr. J. R. Desai, a promoter-director of the company, was found to have contravened Regulations 4(a), (b), (c) and (d) of the PFUTP Regulations, 1995 by indulging in non-genuine trades, trade reversals, and use of multiple client codes that created a false and misleading appearance of trading and impacted share prices. He was restrained from accessing the securities market and from buying, selling or otherwise dealing in securities, directly or indirectly, for a period of one year.
Full text
Page 2 of 10 director of the company and had dealt in the shares of the company during the investigation period through Thakkar Securities Private Limited, who was an unregistered sub-broker of Pramod Kumar Jain Securities Private Limited (Member, BSE). It was also found that multiple client codes were used for placing orders for the noticee. The noticee was found to be involved in the reversal of trades with others.
Page 3 of 10 submissions in the matter, he may write to SEBI within fifteen days from the date of the publication, failing which the matter would be decided ex-parte.
Page 4 of 10 document of the other directors who are also involved in the aforesaid caption matter.” Thereafter, SEBI vide letter dated November 12, 2009 informed that all relevant material documents which have been relied upon had been provided to the noticee, vide letter dated September 1, 2009. It was also informed that as regards other information documents, the same have not been provided to him as they were not relied upon in the matter. In view of the same, a final opportunity of personal hearing was granted to the noticee on December 3, 2009. In the said letter, it was also informed that no further adjournment would be granted in the matter and that on his failure to appear, the matter would be decided based on the documents available on record. Instead of filing any reply, the advocate for the noticee, vide letter dated November 13, 2009 reiterated his request made in his previous letters. Subsequently, the advocate vide letter dated November 13, 2009 had again made the same request. I note that the prima facie violations committed by the noticee were explained in detail in the show cause notice itself and all documents which were relied upon by SEBI in respect of the said allegations have been already furnished to the noticee. The noticee was also specifically informed that, SEBI had not furnished the other documents/information as the same were not relied upon in the case against the noticee. I further note that sufficient opportunities were afforded to the noticee
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/190/12/2009. 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.