Sudhir Bapusaheb Devkar
Penalties and directions recorded
- Impugned adjudication orders quashed.
- The impugned adjudication orders were quashed.
SAT-appeal
- SAT matter SATV-0C3666CEC77886D51B9B66B9Miscellaneous Application No. 96 of 2023 dismissed as infructuous · Miscellaneous Application No. 97 of 2023 dismissed as infructuousAppeal: Miscellaneous Applications Nos. 96 and 97 of 2023 in Appeals Nos. 654 and 655 of 2022 dismissed as infructuous on 30 January 2023
- Alleged failure by employees to disclose trades exceeding Rs. 10 lakh in a calendar quarter within two trading days under Regulation 7(2)(a). No UPSI possession or insider trading allegation was established.Impugned adjudication orders quashed. · Appeal Nos. 654 and 655 of 2022 allowed with no order as to costs.Appeal: Appeal Nos. 654 and 655 of 2022 decided together and allowed by SAT on 10 October 2022.
- Alleged failure by employees to make continual disclosures to Mindtree Ltd. after trading in its securities for an aggregate traded value exceeding Rs. 10 lakh during a calendar quarter. The appellants were not found to be in possession of UPSI.Both appeals were allowed. · The impugned adjudication orders were quashed.Appeal: Appeal Nos. 654 and 655 of 2022 decided together and allowed by SAT on 10 October 2022.
- SAT matter SATV-2EA50E076E501675393525CFMiscellaneous Application No. 96 of 2023 dismissed as infructuous · Miscellaneous Application No. 97 of 2023 dismissed as infructuousAppeal: Miscellaneous Applications Nos. 96 and 97 of 2023 in Appeal Nos. 654 and 655 of 2022 were dismissed as infructuous on 30 January 2023; underlying appeals were not decided in this order.
Source: SecMarx — Sudhir Bapusaheb Devkar. 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.