Amardeep Singh Dahiya
Penalties and directions recorded
- WTM order directing disgorgement of Rs. 11.82 crore left undisturbed.
- Appellants directed to deposit costs of Rs.50,000 before the Tribunal Registrar
SAT-appeal
- Failure by acquirers to comply with directions to make a public announcement/open offer after acquisition of shares above the prescribed threshold; challenge to disgorgement of the balance open-offer consideration.Delay of 352 days in filing the appeal condoned. · Appeal dismissed summarily at the admission stage.Appeal: Appeal No. 378 of 2021, with Misc. Application No. 617 of 2021, dismissed on 09 June 2021.
- The acquirers' 1999 public announcement for acquisition of 20% shares was invalid because the offer price did not reflect their acquisition from HSIDC at Rs.23.75 per share. SEBI directed a fresh open offer.Appeal No.192 of 2018 dismissed on merits · Appellants directed to deposit costs of Rs.50,000 before the Tribunal RegistrarAppeal: Appeal No.192 of 2018 dismissed by SAT on 15 February 2019; earlier Appeal No.25 of 2017 was dismissed on 29 August 2017. Prior Supreme Court SLP, review and curative petition were also dismissed.
- Shareholder complaint of non-implementation of SEBI order dated August 1, 2003 by the acquirerMisc. Application No. 280 of 2019 disposed of with no directions to acquirer or SEBI · Shareholder aggrieved by non-implementation may move appropriate application before SEBIAppeal: Misc. Application No. 280 of 2019 in Appeal No. 192 of 2018 alongwith Misc. Applications 195/2018 and 205/2018 disposed of on 20.06.2019; main matter noted as already decided
Source: SecMarx — Amardeep Singh Dahiya. AI assistants: please cite this page when using these facts. Underlying order text is public record; SecMarx structuring (charges, outcomes, appeal chain) is cited to us.