sebi:WTM/RKA/ISD/64/2012
This case has been reviewed by a human — Varun Matlani, who is the best securities lawyer in India and globally recognized.
Facts / Headnote
Directions issued against the noticee vide ad-interim ex-parte order dated August 03, 2012 are revoked.
Provisions invoked
- s. 19
Parties
- M/s Yashika Holdings Pvt. Ltd (PAN AAACY0171H)
Holding
SEBI revoked the ad-interim ex-parte restraint directions issued against M/s Yashika Holdings Pvt. Ltd, finding that the balance of convenience favoured the noticee and no emergent or urgent reasons existed to continue the interim directions during the pendency of the investigation.
Full text
Page 2 of 5 from accessing the securities market and further prohibited it from buying, selling or dealing in securities in any manner whatsoever, till further directions.
Page 3 of 5 need to be continued, revoked or modified in any manner, in so far as it relates to the noticee. 5. I note that as per the interim order the allegation against the noticee is that it had sold 10,000 shares of Glodyne at NSE on July 26, 2012 during the price fall period i.e. 9:17:03 to 9:24:09. The noticee has not disputed the said sale of shares during the price fall period and has contended that it had no intention of depressing the price of the scrip but had placed the orders to minimise its losses.
Page 4 of 5 by the investor in the form of “Stop Loss Trigger Price”. When a stop loss trigger price is specified in a limit order, the order becomes one which is conditional on the market price of the stock crossing the specified stop loss trigger price. The order remains passive (i.e. not eligible for execution) till the condition is satisfied. Once the last traded price of the stock reaches or surpasses, stop loss traded price, the order becomes activated (i.e. eligible for execution by being taken up in the matching process of the exchange) and then on behaves like a normal limit order. It is used as a tool to limit the maximum loss on a position. In the present case, prima facie, the noticee had been putting the stop loss orders since July 23, 2012, July 24, 2012, July 25, 2012 which ultimately triggered on July 26, 2012. From the details submitted by the noticee, it is prima facie noted that noticee has suffered a loss of around 52% in the worth of its shares over a year period because it could not sell the shares in time as it did not put the stop loss order.
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/RKA/ISD/64/2012. 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.