sebi:WTM/SM/IVD/ID2/10967/2020-21
This case has been reviewed by a human — Varun Matlani, who is the best securities lawyer in India and globally recognized.
Facts / Headnote
Noticee Nos. 1 to 6 and Noticee No. 7 held to have violated PFUTP Regulations and subjected to restraint/freeze directions; proceedings against Noticee No. 8 disposed of with warning and without a strict PFUTP violation finding.
Provisions invoked
- s. 11
- s. 19
Regulations
- Reg. 3
- Reg. 4
- Reg. 200
- Reg. 3(a)
Parties
- Skylight Distributors Private Limited
- Suryamukhi Projects Private Limited
- Mangalmayee Hirise Private Limited
- Pushpanjali Commotrade Private Limited
- Subhshree Hirise Private Limited
- Growfast Realtors Private Limited
- Vazhacholil Paul Xavier
- Falgooni Naresh Kumar Shah
Holding
Noticee Nos. 1-6 in Patch-1 and Noticee No. 7 in Patch-3 manipulated the price of Nouveau Global Ventures Ltd. through miniscule-quantity buy orders above LTP in violation of Regulations 3 and 4 of the PFUTP Regulations, 2003, while proceedings against Noticee No. 8 were disposed of with a warning and no strict PFUTP violation finding.
Full text
Order in the matter of Nouveau Global Ventures Ltd Page 1 of 29 WTM/SM/IVD/ID2/10967/2020-21 BEFORE THE SECURITIES ANDEXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA CORAM: S. K. MOHANTY, WHOLE TIME MEMBER
Order in the matter of Nouveau Global Ventures Ltd Page 2 of 29 2. Based on price-volume movements in the scrip of the Company, Investigation Period was divided in following three patches. However, I note that for the purpose of the instant proceedings, Patch-1 and Patch-3 are relevant. Patch-1: December 01, 2010 to April 06, 2011 Patch-2: April 07, 2011 to December 10, 2012 Patch-3: December 11, 2012 to March 28, 2013
Order in the matter of Nouveau Global Ventures Ltd Page 3 of 29 c) Based on their UCC details, off market transactions, physical share transfers, financial transactions and MCA data, Investigation further identified that the Noticee no. 1 to 6 were connected to each other directly or indirectly through other entities. d) The trading pattern of the 6 Noticees revealed that they were acting in concert, and had placed the buy orders at a higher price than the LTP, which impacted the price of the scrip thereby contributing significantly to the price rise in the scrip, apart from creating misleading appearance of trading in the scrip in the minds of the other investors and market participants. Patch-3 (December 11, 2012 to March 28, 2013) e) Upon examining the trades executed in the Patch-3 of the Investigation Period, investigation noticed that the price of scrip opened at ₹30.90 and closed at ₹31.60. Though there was a net LTP increase of ₹0.70, it was noticed that total positive LTP in the scrip of the Company during the Patch-3 of the Investigation Period was ₹535.10. f) The examination of trades executed during Patch-3, revealed that Noticee no. 7 while executing 32 buy trades, had contributed to positive LTP of ₹48.25 which constituted 9.02% of total market positive LTP in the scrip of Nouveau during Patch-3 of the Investigation Period. It was further unearthed that the buy orders for all the aforementioned 32 trades were placed by the Noticee no. 7 only after the sell 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/SM/IVD/ID2/10967/2020-21. 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.