Order in respect of Jaydeep Mane in the matter of Mega Corporation Limited
- Order No.WTM/PS/19/IVD/ID-1/AUG/2011
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where adjudication proceedings against a person named in an ad interim restraining order have concluded without any penalty being imposed, and the facts and circumstances of the case do not warrant continuing the restraint, the directions against that person need not be continued and may be revoked. The Board may revoke interim directions previously issued against a person under Sections 11B and 11(4)(b) of the SEBI Act, exercising its power under Section 19 read with those provisions, with immediate effect.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
IN THE SCRIP OF MEGA CORPORATION LIMITED In respect of Mr. Jaydeep Mane ORDER Under Sections 11B and 11(4)(b) of Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992
1. Securities and Exchange Board of India (hereinafter referred to as ‘SEBI’) conducted a preliminary examination of the dealings in the scrip of Mega Corporation Limited (hereinafter referred to as ‘Mega’ or the ‘company’), upon noticing sudden variation in price and volume in the scrip. The preliminary examination revealed that the price of the scrip of Mega at Bombay Stock Exchange Limited (hereinafter referred to as ‘BSE’) increased from `5.25 to `41.10 during the period of January, 2005 to September 16, 2005, thereby representing an increase of 683%. Substantial variations in average monthly volumes were also observed in the scrip of Mega.
2. Pursuant to the preliminary investigation and pending inquiry, SEBI vide an ad interim ex-parte Order dated October 24, 2005 issued under Sections 11B and 11(4) (b) of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 (hereinafter referred to as ‘SEBI Act’) directed Mega not to issue any equity shares or any other instrument convertible into equity shares or alter its capital structure in any manner till further directions follow in this regard. This order also directed the promoters and the directors of Mega not to buy, sell or deal in the securities of Mega, directly or indirectly, till further directions. Directions were also issued against certain brokers of the BSE and a few trading clients. The said trading clients including Mr. Jaydeep Mane, were directed not to buy, sell or deal in securities of Mega, directly or indirectly, till further directions in this regard.
3. The interim order also afforded an opportunity to these entities/ persons, to whom the directions were issued, to file their objections, if any, in respect of the order, within 15 days from the date of the order and, if they so desire, avail themselves of an opportunity of personal hearing. Subsequent to their filing of the replies and availing opportunities of hearing afforded to them, SEBI confirmed the ad interim ex-parte directions vide an order dated July 24, 2006, against all the persons/ entities named in the Order dated October 24, 2005.
4. Upon completion of the investigation, suitable actions were initiated against the persons/ entities covered in the interim order as well as certain others. In respect of Mr. Jaydeep Mane, one of the trading clients named in the ad interim ex-parte order, adjudication proceedings were initiated under Chapter VI A of the SEBI Act. However, I note that no penalty was imposed on Jaydeep Mane. Therefore, taking into consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the ad interim directions, in respect of Mr. Jaydeep Mane need not be continued and that it can be revoked
5. Accordingly, I, in exercise of the powers conferred upon me under Section 19 of the SEBI Act read with Sections 11B and 11(4)(b) thereof, do hereby revoke the directions issued vide Securities and Exchange Board of India orders dated October 24, 2005 and July 24, 2006, against Mr. Jaydeep Mane with immediate effect.
DATE: 16/AUGUST/2011 PRASHANT SARAN 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