Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.59 seconds)
Documents citing Aahuti Rasik Mistry vs Sebi on 27 March, 2023

Sunil Goel & Anr. vs Sebi on 19 October, 2023

4. Considering the aforesaid, we dispose of the appeal directing the WTM to pass orders on the application of the appellants within two weeks from today. While passing the order, the WTM will consider the orders of this Tribunal in Appeal No. 284 of 2023 Arshad Warsi & Ors. vs. SEBI and Appeal No. 285 of 2023 Aahuti Ramesh Mistry vs. SEBI decided on March 27, 2023 and Appeal No. 679 of 2023 Jatin Manubhai Shah and other companion appeals vs. SEBI decided on October 9, 2023.
Securities Appellate Tribunal Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Trafiksol Its Technologies Limited vs Sebi & Another on 24 January, 2025

Learned senior advocate also submitted that quote from another entity M/s. Logiciel Pvt. Ltd. was in similar range, and hence the allegation of diversion of IPO further remains unsubstantiated. Further, there is no finding on record to suggest that the quotation from OCPL was part of a scheme to divert IPO proceeds. Learned WTM has not given any finding by stating that these questions remained unanswered due to the complaint and subsequent regulatory intervention. 4.8 Learned senior advocate also submitted that the appellant had no connection or involvement in the operations of OCPL and the allegation of violation of PFUTP Regulations fails as respondent No. 1 failed to demonstrate the element of "fraud" and the entire finding is based on conjunctures and surmises, since the quotation was taken only for budgetary estimate purpose and that the appellant was not aware that the OCPL is allegedly a shell company. The learned senior advocate, in this regard, relied upon the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Arshad Warsi & Anr. vs. SEBI Appeal No. 254 of 2023 decided on March 27, 2023 19 and contended that action cannot be taken on the basis of mere conjunctures and surmises. Relying upon Order 30, Rule 5 of CPC 1908, it was submitted that it is well established that such a preventive measure cannot be undertaken in routine manner and has to be taken only in extreme circumstances.
Securities Appellate Tribunal Cites 19 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Angad M Rathod vs Sebi on 9 October, 2023

17. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record we find that the controversy involved in the present appeal is squarely covered by a decision of this Tribunal in Appeal no. 284 of 2023, Arshad Husain Warsi and Others vs SEBI and other connected appeals decided on March 27, 2023 wherein we had set aside the directions and issued certain directions during the pendency of the 16 investigation. In our view the appellant is also entitled for the same relief for the following reasons:-
Securities Appellate Tribunal Cites 9 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1