Back
AJAY RASTOGI, B. V. NAGARATHNA
DKG Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Adjudicating and Enquiry Officer, S. E. B. I. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. common procedural ruling on appeals. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. background on the corporations and share manipulation. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. sebi's investigative findings and subsequent penalties. (Para 7 , 11) |
| 4. details regarding the procedural issues faced by appellants. (Para 8 , 10 , 12 , 13 , 17 , 18) |
| 5. court's analysis of violations and rationale for penalties. (Para 21 , 22 , 26 , 29 , 33) |
| 6. application of penalties in light of established facts. (Para 37 , 39 , 40 , 44) |
| 7. final judgment confirms prior orders and penalties. (Para 46) |
JUDGMENT :
B.V. NAGARATHNA, J.
1. These Civil Appeals arise out of common impugned Order dated 07.01.2009 passed by the Securities Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai (for short “SAT”).
2. Since the questions of law and issues which arise to be dealt with in both the above captioned Civil Appeals are similar and the matters are distinct only in their respective facts and events, these appeals are being disposed of by this common judgment.
3. The appellant in Civil Appeal No. 1742 of 2009 is a Private Limited Company which was incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 on 15.04.1997. The appellant in Civil Appeal No. 5833 of 2009 was incorporated under
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation and application of the pre-amended and amended provisions of Section 24 of the SEBI Act in determining the guilt and imposition ....
The court affirmed that the Special Judge has discretion in compounding offence penalties under the SEBI Act, and can determine interest rates independently of SEBI's recommendations.
The SEBI Adjudication process mandates a preliminary opinion for the appointment of an Adjudicating Officer, and failure to record this opinion can vitiate subsequent proceedings.
(1) Power of compounding must be expressly conferred by Statute which creates offence. (2) Section 147 of N.I. Act does not expressly incorporate permission of Court for compounding, conceivably beca....
Income Tax Officer has no jurisdiction to issue a notice under Section 34 of the Income Tax Act.
Appeal to Supreme Court – Supreme Court will exercise jurisdiction only when there is a question of law arising for consideration from decision of Tribunal – A question of law may arise when there is....
A court may compel the SEBI to disclose documents relevant to compounding applications, reinforcing that while SEBI’s views are influential, they do not override judicial discretion in deciding these....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
