Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Order in the Matter of Summary Proceedings against the Stock Brokers who defaulted in Payment of Registration Fees

Securities And Exchange Board Of India15 July 2010

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

Where stock brokers have, after an officer's report recommending suspension of their registration, paid the outstanding registration fees due under the schedule to the Stock Brokers and Sub-Brokers Regulations, 1992, suspension of their certificates of registration is not warranted. Summary proceedings initiated under regulations since repealed and replaced may be disposed of under the powers conferred by Section 19 of the SEBI Act, 1992, read with Regulation 33B(5) and (6) of the SEBI (Intermediaries) Regulations, 2008, without any direction against the brokers.

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

Judgment

As delivered

WTM/MSS/MIRSD/58/2010SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA, MUMBAIORDERUNDER REGULATIONS 33A AND 33B OF THE SEBI (INTERMEDIARIES)REGULATIONS, 2008IN THE MATTER OF SUMMARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE STOCKBROKERS WHO DEFAULTED IN PAYMENT OF REGISTRATION FEES

1. Vide Order dated August 11, 2005 under Regulation 16(1) of the extant SEBI (Procedure for Holding Enquiry by Enquiry Officer and Imposing Penalty) Regulations, 2002, SEBI had appointed officers to conduct summary proceedings, inter alia, against the following three stock brokers who had defaulted in the payment of registration fees: SL. NO. NAME OF STOCK BROKER REGN. NO. STOCK EXCHANGE 1 Thomas Oommen INB090689511 Cochin 2 Rajive Kumar Gupta INB050096219 Delhi 3 Preet Mohinder Singh INB120711915 Ludhiana

2. The Officers have submitted their reports recommending suspension of certificates of registration of the aforesaid three stock brokers.

3. I have considered the recommendations of the Officers. I however, note that the aforesaid three stock brokers have subsequently paid the outstanding fees as per Schedule III of the SEBI (Stock Brokers and Sub-Brokers) Regulations, 1992 and hence suspension is not warranted.

4. I note that the SEBI (Procedure for Holding Enquiry by Enquiry Officer and Imposing Penalty) Regulations, 2002 have since been repealed and replaced by the SEBI (Intermediaries) Regulations, 2008.

5. I, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred upon me under Section 19 of the SEBI Act, 1992 read with Regulation 33B (5) and (6) of the SEBI (Intermediaries) Regulations, 2008, hereby dispose of the proceedings initiated vide Order dated August 11, 2005 against the said three stock brokers without any direction. I, however, advise these three stock brokers to pay the fees as per the Regulations in future. 6. A copy of this Order shall be served on the stock exchanges of which these three stock brokers are members.

7. This Order shall come into force with immediate effect.

DATE: July 15, 2010 M. S. SAHOO 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