D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, SURYA KANT, BELA M TRIVEDI
State of Maharashtra – Appellant
Versus
63 Moons Technologies Ltd. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. nsel's operations and legality (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 5) |
| 2. events leading to the property attachment (Para 4 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 3. arguments from parties regarding nsel's classification (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 4. analysis of mpid act's framework (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 5. understanding the definitions and operations under nsel (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25) |
| 6. interpretation of deposits according to mpid act (Para 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34) |
| 7. legal implications of evidence presented (Para 35 , 36 , 37) |
| 8. conclusion on the validity of attachment notifications (Para 66 , 67) |
JUDGMENT
Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J.
| A. Facts |
| B. Submissions |
| C. Analysis |
| C. 1 Framework of the MPID Act |
| C. 2 Framework of NSE |
| C. 3 Definitions of 'Deposit' and 'Financial Establishment': Interpretation of Section 2 (c) and 2(d) of the MPID Act |
| C. 3.1 Settlement Guarantee Fund: Deposit under Section 2 (c) of the MPID Act |
| C. 3. 2 Receipt of commodities: Deposit under Section 2 (c) of the Act . |
| C.4 Uncovering the Conspiracy |
| C. 4.1 The Grant Thornton Report |
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.