sebi:WTM/MB/ISD/13004/2021-22

SEBI · SEBI · 2020-08-18 · Madhabi Puri Buch, Whole Time Member

Reviewed by Varun Matlani, Advocate — Securities Lawyer practicing in SAT and SEBI

Facts / Headnote

Prima facie held that Noticee No. 1 communicating UPSIs to Noticee Nos. 2 and 3, onward communication to Noticee Nos. 4 and 5, trading by Noticee Nos. 2 to 5 through accounts of Noticee Nos. 6 to 14, and account access by Noticee Nos. 6 to 14 prima facie violated SEBI Act and PIT Regulations

Provisions invoked

s. 11(4)
s. 19
s. 12A
s. 12
s. 27
s. 23
s. 167
s. 68

Regulations relied on

SEBI (PFUTP) Regulations, 2003
SEBI (PIT) Regulations, 2015
SEBI (PIT) Regulations, 2015 — 2(1)(d)
SEBI (PIT) Regulations, 2015 — 2(1)(g)
SEBI (PIT) Regulations, 2015 — 2(1)(n)
SEBI (PIT) Regulations, 2015 — 3(5)

Parties

Gopal Ritolia
Jatin Chawla
Amit B Jajoo
Manish Jajoo
Gomati Devi Ritolia
Daljit Chawla
Monika Jajoo / Monika Lakholia
Pushpadevi Jajoo
Bhawarlal Jajoo
Bhawarlal Jajoo HUF
Ritesh Jajoo
Successure Partners
Yash Jajoo

Holding

SEBI prima facie held that ZEEL financial-results information constituted UPSI (UPSI 1 to 4) and that communication of such UPSI down the chain from Noticee No. 1 to Noticee Nos. 2-5 and trading in ZEEL through the accounts of Noticee Nos. 6-14 while in possession of and on the basis of UPSI prima facie violated the SEBI Act and PIT Regulations.

Full text

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

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.

Analyse this matter in Ontology · Plans

Source: SecMarx — sebi:WTM/MB/ISD/13004/2021-22. 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.