Dr. R. Rukmani vs Sebi

Date of Decision : 10.04.2017

Misc. Application No. 120 of 2017 And Appeal No. 42 of 2015

1.

Regenix Drugs Ltd.

Jamala Sonu Terrace, #42B, Loganathan Nagar, 100 Feet Road, Choolaimedu Chennai-6000094

2. Ayyavu Ramamurthy Managing Director, Regenix Drugs Limited, 3-9-4, Arihant Majestic Towers, 100 Feet Road, Choolaimedu, Chennai - 6000094. ...Appellants

Versus

Securities and Exchange Board of India SEBI Bhavan, Plot No. C-4A, G Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai - 400 051. ...Respondent

WITH

Misc. Application No. 121 of 2017 And Appeal No. 43 of 2015

Mr. Aravind Devanathan # 726, 6th Bcross, 3rd Block, Kormangala, Bangalore-560034. ...Appellant

Versus

Securities and Exchange Board of India SEBI Bhavan, Plot No. C-4A, G Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai - 400 051. ...Respondent 2

WITH

Misc. Application No. 122 of 2017 And Appeal No. 44 of 2015

Mr. Raju Gunasekaran Director, Regenix Drugs Limited 54 B/2, Madhuram Colony, Puthur, Trichy - 560034. ...Appellant

Versus

Securities and Exchange Board of India SEBI Bhavan, Plot No. C-4A, G Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), ...Respondent Mumbai - 400 051.

WITH Misc. Application No. 123 of 2017 And Appeal No. 45 of 2015

Mrs. Malathy Ramamurthy No. 394, 100 Feet Road, Arihant Mejestic Tower, Koyambedu, ...Appellant Chennai - 600107.

Versus

Securities and Exchange Board of India SEBI Bhavan, Plot No. C-4A, G Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), ...Respondent Mumbai - 400 051.

WITH Misc. Application No. 124 of 2017 And Appeal No. 56 of 2015

Mr. Govindarajan Venkatakrishna Regenix Drugs Limited 42, Kathiresan Kovil Road, Kovilpatti, 628502 - Tamil Nadu ...Appellant

Versus

Securities and Exchange Board of India SEBI Bhavan, Plot No. C-4A, G Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), ...Respondent Mumbai - 400 051.

3 WITH Misc. Application No. 125 of 2017 And Appeal No. 57 of 2015

Mr. Natarajan Arun Old No. 23, New No. 12, Customs Colony, Saidapet, Chennai - 6000015. ...Appellant

Versus

Securities and Exchange Board of India SEBI Bhavan, Plot No. C-4A, G Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), ...Respondent Mumbai - 400 051.

WITH Misc. Application No. 126 of 2017 And Appeal No. 58 of 2015

Mr. Vishwas Vasant Pathak C 302, Lotous Court, Opp Vca Ground, Civil Lines, ...Appellant Nagpur - 440001.

Versus Securities and Exchange Board of India SEBI Bhavan, Plot No. C-4A, G Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), ...Respondent Mumbai - 400 051.

WITH Misc. Application No. 146 of 2015 And Appeal No. 181 of 2015

Dr. R. Rukmani D/o. C. Ramakrishnan 8/2A, Patel Road, Virudhunagar - 626001. ...Appellant Versus

1. Securities and Exchange Board of India SEBI Bhavan, Plot No. C-4A, G Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai - 400 051.

2. Regenix Drugs Limited Jamala Sonu Terrace, 42, Loganathan Nagar, Choolaimedu, Chennai - 600094. ...Respondents 4

Mr. Vinay Chauhan, Advocate with Mr. K.C. Jacob, Advocate i/b Corporate Law Chambers India for Appellant in Appeal Nos. 42 to 45 of 2015, 56 to 58 of 2015.

Mr. Dipakar Livingstone, Advocate for the Appellant in Appeal No. 181 of 2015.

Mr. Pulkit Sukhramani, Advocate i/b The Law Point for the Respondent in Appeal Nos. 42 to 45 of 2015, 56 to 58 of 2015 and 181 of 2015.

CORAM : Jog Singh, Member Dr. C.K.G. Nair, Member

Per : Jog Singh (Oral)

Appeal Nos. 42, 43, 44, 45, 56, 57 and 58 of 2015

1. These appeals have been preferred by the appellants namely Regenix

Drugs Limited and its directors challenging the order passed by the Whole

Time Member of Securities and Exchange Board of India ('SEBI' for short)

on November 10, 2014 directing them to refund the money in question to

the allottees with interest at the rate of 15% per annum. The appellants are

stated to have violated the provisions of Section 73 read with Section 67(3)

of the Companies Act, 1956 and also various provisions of SEBI

(Disclosure and Investor Protection) Guidelines, 2000 ('DIP Guidelines' for

short). Certain violations regarding SEBI (Issue of Capital and Disclosure

Requirements) Regulations, 2009 ('ICDR Regulations' for short) were also

alleged to have been committed by the appellants.

2. Both the parties agree that during the pendency of these appeals the

appellants have preferred settlement application dated November 30, 2016

for amicable resolution of the issue. Accordingly, the terms of settlement

were in-principle approved by the HPAC of SEBI on March 20, 2017 and 5

appellants have also complied with the terms of settlement, inter alia, by

paying Rs. 35,20,000/- towards the settlement charges and Rs. 9,17,640/-

towards cost of legal expenses. Pursuant to the terms of Settlement

appellants have also opened an escrow account remitting an amount of Rs.

93,70,653/- in Axis Bank. These facts are not disputed by learned counsel

for SEBI.

3. In view of this admitted position the Tribunal accords its approval

under Regulation 16(2) of the SEBI (Settlement of Administrative and Civil

Proceedings) Regulation, 2014.

4. All these appeals accordingly stand disposed of in terms of above

settlement. Similarly, Miscellaneous Application Nos. 120 to 126 of 2017

also stand disposed of.

Appeal No. 181 of 2015 with Misc. Application No. 146 of 2015

5. Misc. Application No. 146 of 2015 has been filed for condonation of

53 days delay in filing Appeal No. 181 of 2015 in question. For the reasons

stated in this Miscellaneous Application, the delay is condoned, the

Miscellaneous Application is, accordingly, disposed of.

6. This appeal has been preferred by one investor namely Dr. R.

Rukmani to intervene in Appeal Nos. 42 of 2015. Mr. Dipakar Livingstone,

learned counsel for the intervener fairly states that the appeal has become

infructuous in view of the terms of settlement in the aforesaid bunch of

appeals.

6 7. Accordingly, this appeal stands disposed of as having become

infructuous in view of settlement in the aforesaid bunch of appeal. No costs.

Sd/-

Jog Singh Member

Sd/-

Dr. C.K.G. Nair Member 10.04.2017 Prepared and compared by:

msb