Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 12 (0.40 seconds)Section 12A in The Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 [Entire Act]
Section 15HA in The Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 [Entire Act]
Excel Crop Care Ltd. vs Competition Commn. Of India on 8 May, 2017
In Excel Corp Care Limited vs Competition
Commission of India & Anr, (2017) 8 SCC 47, the Supreme
Court held:
A.P.Dairy Dev.Corp.Federation vs B.Narasimha Reddy & Ors on 2 September, 2011
In Andhra Pradesh
Dairy Development Corporation Federation vs. B.
Narasimha Reddy and Others (2011) 9 SCC 286, the
Supreme Court held:
Nirma Industries Ltd. & Anr vs Securities & Exchange Board Of India on 9 May, 2013
11. We also held that Company and its MDs were aware of
the pledge agreement, non-disclosure of the pledge agreement
and loan agreement invited penalty. Further, the corporate
announcement did not disclose the fact that the subsisting
pledge agreement facilitated the subscribers to subscribe to
the GDR issue. The corporate announcement was misleading
and presented a distorted version to the investors and created
a false version inducing the investors to deal in securities.
The aforesaid findings have been given in a large number of
7
matters decided by this Tribunal especially in Appeal no. 381
of 2019, Sibly Industries Ltd. vs SEBI and other companion
appeals decided on July 14, 2022, Appeal no. 438 of 2020,
Aksh Optifibre Ltd. vs SEBI and other companion appeals
decided on June 27, 2022 and Appeal no. 28 of 2022,
Praveen Kumar Hastimal Shah vs SEBI and other
companion appeals decided on July 6, 2022.
Sybly Industries Ltd. & Ors. vs Sebi on 14 July, 2022
In Sybly Industries Ltd. v. SEBI,
appeal no.381 of 219 and other connected appeals decided
on 14th July, 2022 penalties ranging from Rs.10 lakhs to
Rs.10.30 crores were imposed which were reduced to Rs.25
lakhs on the Company and Rs.10 lakhs on the Managing
Director. Thus, in our opinion, the penalty imposed is
12
excessive and disproportionate to the violation and is also
discriminatory.
Article 21 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Reliance Airports Developers P. Ltd. vs Airports Authority Of India And Ors. on 21 April, 2006
"29. It is a settled legal proposition that Article 14 of
the Constitution strikes at arbitrariness because an
action that is arbitrary, must necessarily involve
negation of equality. This doctrine of arbitrariness is not
restricted only to executive actions, but also applies to
legislature. Thus, a party has to satisfy that the action
was reasonable, not done in unreasonable manner or
capriciously or at pleasure without adequate
determining principle, rational, and has been done
according to reason or judgment, and certainly does not
depend on the will alone. However, the action of
legislature, violative of Article 14 of the Constitution,
should ordinarily be manifestly arbitrary. There must be
a case of substantive unreasonableness in the statute
itself for declaring the act ultra vires of Article 14 of the
Constitution. (Vide: Ajay Hasia etc. v. Khalid Mujib
Sehravardi, Reliance Airport Developers (P) Ltd. v.
Airports Authority of India, Bidhannagar (Salt Lake)
Welfare Assn. v. Central Valuation Board, Grand
Kakatiya Sheraton Hotel and Towers Employees and
Workers Union v. Srinivasa Resorts Limited, and State
of T.N. v. K. Shyam Sunder.)"
Dr. Kailash S. Choudhari vs Sebi on 20 April, 2021
11. We also held that Company and its MDs were aware of
the pledge agreement, non-disclosure of the pledge agreement
and loan agreement invited penalty. Further, the corporate
announcement did not disclose the fact that the subsisting
pledge agreement facilitated the subscribers to subscribe to
the GDR issue. The corporate announcement was misleading
and presented a distorted version to the investors and created
a false version inducing the investors to deal in securities.
The aforesaid findings have been given in a large number of
7
matters decided by this Tribunal especially in Appeal no. 381
of 2019, Sibly Industries Ltd. vs SEBI and other companion
appeals decided on July 14, 2022, Appeal no. 438 of 2020,
Aksh Optifibre Ltd. vs SEBI and other companion appeals
decided on June 27, 2022 and Appeal no. 28 of 2022,
Praveen Kumar Hastimal Shah vs SEBI and other
companion appeals decided on July 6, 2022.