SAT Sets Aside SEBI Findings Of Fraud Against NDTV Promoters; Reduces Penalties Imposed For Non-Disclosure Of Loan Agreement

The Securities Appellate Tribunal at Mumbai has set aside the findings of the Securities and Exchange Board of India which held NDTV promoters Prannoy Roy and Radhika Roy liable for committing fraud on its investors by non-disclosure of a loan agreement with Vishvapradhan Commercial Pvt Ltd.The SAT also reversed the SEBI finding that the the promoters had ceded control to VCPL over NDTV...

Patna HC Directs For Personal Presence Of Sahara Group Chief Subrata Roy To Explain Group's Plan To Return Investors' Money

The Patna high court earlier this week directed Sahara India Group Head Subrato Roy to remain personally present before the Court on May 11 and to come up with a plan for the return of the investment of the investors.The Bench of Justice Sandeep Kumar issued this order in 3 anticipatory bail applications after it came across certain cases of cheating committed by Non-Banking...

Insider Trading Can't Be Presumed Due To Proximity Between Parties; Onus To Prove Is On SEBI : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has held that insider trading cannot be presumed merely on the basis of proximity between the parties. The Court held 'communication' of Unpublished Price Sensitive Information under Regulation 3(1) of the SEBI (Prohibition of Insider Trading), 2015 ought to be proved by producing cogent materials, like, letters, emails, witnesses etc. and not be deemed owing to the...

SEBI v SAT : Supreme Court Stays Order Of Securities Appellate Tribunal Imposing Rs 8 Lakhs Cost On SEBI

The Supreme Court on Wednesday stayed the award of costs of 8 lakh imposed on Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) by the Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT).A Bench comprising Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice Surya Kant issued notice in SEBI's civil appeal filed challenging the order passed by SAT. The issue arose from an order passed by SEBI's Whole Time Member (WTM)...

Investor Or Creditor? – The SEBI V. IBC Battle

The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code ("IBC") was introduced in India in order to consolidate laws relating to reorganisation and insolvency resolution. However, the revolutionary legislation has been at odds with some of the pre-existing or contemporary financial legislations such as the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 ("PMLA"), the Maharashtra Relief Undertakings (Special Provisions Act), 1958 the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 and most recently the novice law...

Quasi-Judicial Authority Has To Disclose Material That Has Been Relied Upon At The Stage Of Adjudication: Supreme Court

The Supreme court observed that a quasi-judicial authority has a duty to disclose the material that has been relied upon at the stage of adjudication.Keeping a party bereft of the information that influenced the decision of an authority undertaking an adjudicatory function undermines the transparency of the judicial process, the bench comprising Justices DY Chandrachud and Sanjiv Khanna...

'Siphoned Off Funds Of RHFL To Other Financially Weak Promoter Group Companies': SEBI Bars Anil Ambani, Reliance Home Finance Ltd From Securities Market

The Securities and Exchange Board of India on Friday (February 11) barred Reliance Home Finance Ltd, industrialist Anil Ambani and three other individuals from dealing with the securities market directly or indirectly for allegedly siphoning off funds from the company. The market regulator passed the interim order based on investigation into the loans which were disbursed by RHFL during...

Analysis Of Recent Changes In The RPT Framework Vis-À-Vis SEBI (LODR) (Sixth Amendment) Regulations, 2021

On September 28, 2021, SEBI in its Board meeting approved changes in the Related Party Transaction ('RPT') framework under the SEBI (Listing Obligations and Disclosure Requirements), Regulations 2015 ("LODR").[1] The changes were based on the recommendations of the Working Group,[2] constituted in November 2019, to review the policy space pertaining to related party transactions. The approved changes in the form of SEBI (LODR) (Sixth Amendment) Regulations, 2021 were notified on...

Remarks Of 'Judicial Dishonesty' Against SEBI's Adjudicating Officer By SAT: Supreme Court Stays Remarks In SEBI's Plea

The Supreme Court of India on Monday stayed the Securities Appellate Tribunal's remarks of 'judicial dishonesty' against SEBI's Adjudicating Officer with regard to SEBI's investigation into irregular trading activities. The Court has also stayed SAT's direction dated 16th December 2021 that a reply be filed by SEBI sworn by the Adjudicating Officer himself and a subsequent order of 23rd...

SEBI Cracks Whip On Stock Price Manipulation Through Telegram, WhatsApp Groups; Bars 6 Persons From Securities Market

The Securities and Exchange Board of India has cracked down on WhatsApp and Telegram groups in which stock-tips were being shared to inflate share prices. In an interim order, the market regulator has barred six individuals from accessing the securities market, after making a prima facie finding that they had indulged in fraudulent and unfair trade practices by making baseless...

Overview Of The Recent Regulatory Changes Concerning Alternative Investment Funds In India

The Securities Exchange Board of India (hereinafter referred to as "SEBI") has recently amended the Alternative Investment Funds Regulations, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as the "AIF Regulations") to inter alia, require filings for placement memorandums with SEBI to be done through a SEBI registered merchant banker effective November 11, 2021. Further, vide its circular dated October 21, 2021 ("Circular"), SEBI has issued the modalities for such filings including the obligations of the...

'What Does He Know?' : Delhi High Court Slams 19-Year Old Petitioner Who Alleged SEBI Irregularities In IPO Approvals

The Delhi High Court today slammed a petitioner for alleging that the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) is approving IPOs (initial public offerings) in a hasty manner, without proper scrutiny.Noting that the Petitioner, who sought the constitution of a fresh body for IPO approvals, was aged merely 19 years and there was little to no likelihood of his understanding the complexities...