directors resorted
to manipulative and deceitful method to suppress material information
from the offer documents which in violation of PFUTP Regulations.
18. It is also ... appellants to suppress utilization of IPO
proceeds by giving loan to RDBRIL. Very fact that RDB resorted to
suppressing material facts from the investors
disclosures were made in the RHP of CARE which
amounts to suppressing material facts in the RHP and
attempt to mislead the investors into believing ... representation made by CARE to RBI on 05.10.2012
amounts to suppressing material facts in the RHP of
CARE and an attempt to mislead the investors
without disclosing the agreement of sale dated 13.3.1985
amounts to suppressing material facts in the prospectus. We see no merit in
the above contention, because ... disclosure of the agreement of sale dated 13.3.1985 amounts to suppressing
material facts in the prospectus.
9. As rightly observed in the impugned order, object
11AA of the
SEBI Act. The Appellant is alleged to have suppressed material information
and not having any intention of co-operating with the Respondent
decision and also the allegation that the Appellant
actively and knowingly suppressed material information so as to mislead and defraud
the Investors in the securities ... contention of the
Respondent that the active role and deliberate suppression of material information
and facts in the Offer Documents with a view to mislead
scheme of Arrangement / Amalgamation sanctioned
by deliberately and willfully suppressing vital and material facts and
thereby practicing fraud on the Courts. It appears that ... SEBI, appellant has got the scheme of Arrangement / Amalgamation
sanctioned by suppressing material facts and by practicing fraud on the
Courts. As noted above
facts of present case, since the appellants are
guilty of suppressing material information without any justification,
imposition of maximum penalty imposable under Section
merit.
5. Basic charge held against the appellants is that by suppressing
material facts from the investors in the IPO, the appellants have violated
Securities
material information. It is held that
16
as the RHP/Prospectus did not contain fair and clear disclosures with
regard to material information, DLF Limited ... Guidelines. It is also held that the aforesaid active and deliberate
suppression of material information in the RHP/Prospectus by DLF
Limited amounted to misleading
sake of convenience, are as under:
1) Non-disclosure of certain material information in the offer
documents; and
2) Diversion of IPO Proceeds and other ... that several
material facts have been allegedly intentionally suppressed in the offer
documents pertaining to the IPO with respect to the utilization
