sebi:WTM/PS/90/MRD/MAR/2015
This case has been reviewed by a human — Varun Matlani, who is the best securities lawyer in India and globally recognized.
Facts / Headnote
Noticee restrained from accepting any position as Managing Director or Chief Executive Officer in any SEBI recognized Stock Exchange for a period of one year.
Provisions invoked
- s. 19
- s. 12A
Regulations
- Reg. 11
- Reg. 8
- Reg. 201
- Reg. 52
Parties
- Mr. P. J. Mathew
Holding
The noticee, Mr. P. J. Mathew, former Managing Director of the Inter-connected Stock Exchange of India Limited, was found liable for failure to ensure compliance with the MIMPS Regulations and for acting as proxy for shareholders in a manner that aligned him with a section of shareholders, and was restrained from accepting any position as MD or CEO in any SEBI recognized Stock Exchange for one year. He was, however, not held liable for the alleged irregularities in the award of the trading platform contract.
Full text
Page 2 of 27 Committee (“the BDC”) comprising of the following ten persons was formed by ISE for recommending selection of vendors : 1. Dr. M. Y. Khan (Public Interest Director and Chairman) 2. Dr. S. D. Israni (Public Interest Director) 3. Mr. M. K. Anandakumar (Shareholder Director) 4. Mr. K. V. Thomas (Shareholder Director) 5. Mr. Jambu Kumar Jain, (Trading Member Director) 6. Mr. P. J. Mathew (Managing Director) 7. Mr. Mahesh L. Soneji (Expert Member) 8. Mr. Manoj Kumar Vijay (Expert Member) 9. Mr. Ashish Parikh (Expert Member) 10. Mr. Gajendranath (Employee of ISE)
Page 3 of 27 ISE (to the SCN issued to it) to SEBI, it was observed that ACL submitted a revised quote only on April 28, 2008 i.e. after the meeting of BDC recommending the name of ACL to the Governing Board. As regards the revised quotes from TCS (the other bidder), the noticee informed SEBI that TCS was not interested in revising of quote, though no documentary support to that effect had been furnished.
Page 4 of 27 (g) It was therefore alleged that noticee was fully aware of the third party software license agreement at the time of award of the contract to ACL and that it appeared to have been deliberately covered up/ignored while listing out the relative strengths of the vendors by BDC/Board. It was also alleged that the noticee failed to perceive that ACL was practically behaving as a re-seller of third party software instead of a software provider.
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/PS/90/MRD/MAR/2015. 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.