Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Final order in the matter of Maniyar Plast Ltd

Securities And Exchange Board Of India1 July 2016

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

Where a listed company has, after a show cause notice issued under section 11B of the SEBI Act, 1992, resolved the investor grievances that it had failed to redress, and SEBI has verified that resolution, the authority need not pass a direction under section 11B restraining the company from accessing the securities market, and the notice may be disposed of without such a direction.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

WTM/RKA/EFD/DRA II/79/2016 BEFORE THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA ORDER UNDER SECTION 11B OF THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA ACT, 1992 In respect of Maniyar Plast Limited 1. Maniyar Plast Limited (hereinafter referred to as ‘the company’) is a listed company having its office address at Maniyar Estate, Paldhi, Jalgaon Maharashtra 425 105. SEBI vide its circular no. CIR/OIAE/1/2012 dated August 13, 2012 directed all listed companies to obtain SEBI Complaints Redress System (SCORES) authentication by September 14, 2012 and to take appropriate necessary steps within seven days of receipt of complaints through SCORES, so as to resolve the complaint within thirty days of its receipt. 2. However, certain companies, including Maniyar Plast Limited did not obtain SCORES authentication within the time period specified in the aforementioned circular, a public notice was issued on January 13, 2013, advising inter alia the companies to obtain SCORES authentication within seven days from the date of the advertisement, failing which SEBI would be constrained to initiate appropriate enforcement actions. However, the company still failed to obtain SCORES authentication and resolve pending investor complaints. 3. Since the company did not obtain SCORES authentication and failed to redress two investor grievances, SEBI issued Show Cause Notices (SCN) dated March 28, 2013 to the company calling upon it to show cause as to why suitable directions including direction to restrain it from accessing the securities market for a specified period should not be passed under section 11B of the SEBI Act. 4. Subsequently, SEBI has verified and confirmed that both the investor grievances have been resolved. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that there is no need to pass any direction under section 11B of the SEBI Act, 1992 against Maniyar Plast Limited as contemplated in the SCN issued to it. The SCN is accordingly disposed of.

Sd/- Date: July 01, 2016 RAJEEV KUMAR AGARWAL Place: Mumbai WHOLE TIME MEMBER SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA

This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.

Research this judgment with Miss Lucy

Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.

Try Miss Lucy free