Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: benefit sharing Court: sebi securities and exchange board of india or securities appellate tribunal sat Page 11 of about 409 results (0.236 seconds)

Anita Dalal Vs. Securities and Exchange Board of India Sebi Bhavan

Court : SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT

..... it is not necessary to consider the issue of extra benefits accruing from volume manipulation since it is evident that the appellant has indulged herself in manipulative activity which is prohibited in futp regulations. 9. ..... with reference to the trade logs it is submitted that there is a vast difference between the quantity of shares transacted and that which got matched. ..... in the affidavit, while dealing with self trades of 28,968 shares the appellant would give credit for the so-called transfer entries to the impugned shares except 500 shares. ..... the appellant has executed self trades in the shares of bang and confidence. ..... it is not a case of a few shares getting matched on one or two occasions. ..... on march 10, 2008, 5000 shares got matched in its transaction with the counter party client. ..... this means that the self trades in respect of 500 shares remain admitted. 8. ..... 24 of 2011 decided on june 8, 2011) this tribunal has held that one cannot buy and sell shares from himself. ..... the explanation given by the appellant in the affidavit filed during the hearing of the appeal is stated to be an after thought and even therein the appellant could not explain the self trades involving 500 shares. .....

Sebi Vs. Cellulose and Chemicals Pvt. Ltd.

Court : SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT

..... b m sardhara - huf, m n sardhara - huf sent a letter dated january 10,2006 stating interalia that bse has dropped the charges of unfair trade practices while reconsidering the company's application for listing of shares and hence sebi should a lso take an appropriate view.3.1 i have considered the findings of the investigation, the show cause notice, replies to the show cause notice and subsequent submissions made by shri navnit ..... on the day of allotment, the price of the scrip was below par, even then ccpl had issued shares on a preferential basis at four times higher than the market price and 38 persons had subscribed to ..... trades the above 11 persons benefited themselves and got the shares allotted @ rs ..... the absence of jobbers and price makers is a fact, so 300 shares were sold to try and generate interest in the normally inert ..... reason or benefit to lower the price of shares of ccpl ..... smita b patel, wife of shri bipinchandra patel, purchased 2500 shares of ccpl and sold 300 shares during the relevant period april 05, 2000 to july 14, 2000 which is considered for ..... . 10) that some of the persons who have thinly traded in the shares of ccpl, happen to be acquainted as alleged, did not justify their being labeled as acting in concert ..... . he had never induced her or prompted her to sell the shares of ccpl and it was her own decision.further, he stated that, as a director he had no personal interest and had no reason to induce fall in the market price of the scrip.2.5 an opportunity of .....

Vse Stock Services Ltd. Vs. Securities and Exchange Board of India

Court : SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT

..... the short question involved in this appeal is whether the appellant is entitled to the fee continuity benefit in terms of securities and exchange board of india (stock brokers and sub brokers) regulations, 1992 (for short the regulations ..... in this view of the matter the appellant cannot claim benefit of paragraph 7 of the circular dated 30th september, 2002 ..... been registered as a broker, the appellant claimed that it should be given the benefit of fee continuity in terms of schedule iii to the regulations. ..... appellant was registered as a broker only on 31/10/2003 but wants the benefit of the initial registration of vse securities ltd. ..... has also been placed on paragraph 7 of the circular dated september 30, 2002 issued by the board providing for the benefit of fee continuity to companies in case of mergers/amalgamations.4. ..... appellant claims that it is entitled to the benefit of initial registration granted to vse securities ltd. ..... that where mergers/amalgamations are carried out as a result of compulsion of law, registration fee would not be charged from the transferee entity, provided the majority shareholders of the transferor entity continue to hold majority shares of the transferee entity. ..... company was incorporated in the year 2001 under the provisions of the companies act, 1956 and is limited by shares. ..... approval was declined on the ground that the bye-laws of nse did not recognize companies limited by guarantee and that it grants approval only to such companies which are limited by shares. .....

Anil Harish Vs. Securities and Exchange Board of India Mumbai

Court : SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT

..... facie revealed that there was delay by the company in disseminating price sensitive information to the stock exchanges regarding its bagging of certain orders and the promoters and the company/related entities had benefitted by purchasing shares of the company prior to dissemination of price sensitive information to public. ..... of the case, in brief, are that the board had conducted investigations into the alleged irregularities in the affairs, trading and dealings in the shares of the company based on certain inputs received from the national stock exchange of india ltd. ..... again in para 21 of the order, it is recorded by him that the price movement in the shares of the company as has been detailed in the table at paragraph 20 above, do indicate that during the last week of august, 2009, its price had moved almost in tandem with the bse sensex and ..... alleged that the appellant had traded in the scrip of the company on august 21, 2009 buying 9600 shares on bse and 10400 shares on nse and also on august 25, 2009 buying 9960 shares on bse and 10040 shares on nse. ..... anil harish alleging that he had traded in the shares of the company on august 21, 2009 and august 25, 2009, that is, just prior to the price sensitive corporate announcement made by the company on august 28, 2009 towards its getting projects worth rs. ..... (nse) regarding price movement in the shares of the company during the period january 1, 2009 to december ..... the shares of the company were listed on the nse and the bombay stock .....

B.P. Amoco Plc and Castrol Limited Vs. Securities and Exchange Board o ...

Court : SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT

..... the public announcement and the subsequent procedural requirements could not be done as per the time schedule as provided in the regulations, in view of the fact that the offer made by appellant no.1 to acquire the shares of the burmah castrol was itself subject to obtaining statutory approvals or acceptance of minimum offer by shareholders of burmah castrol, the minimum offer price to be offered to the shareholders of the indian target company ought ..... the offer so made was subject to certain conditions which included (i) the condition that the appellant would be bound by the offer only if valid acceptance was received from not less than 90% of share holders of burmah castrol plc, unless such requirement is waived by the appellant (the acceptance condition) and (ii) no material adverse change having occurred in the business, assets, financial or trading position or ..... acquirer" appearing in the regulation, regulation 2 (1) (b) has to be referred to, therein "acquirer" has been defined as any person who, directly or indirectly, acquires or agrees to acquire shares or voting rights in the target company, or acquires or agrees to acquire control over the target company, either by himself or with any person acting in concert with the acquirer.30. ..... the point of view of the appellants as well as the public shareholders of castrol india for the reason that it has a strong bearing on the financial burden on the appellants and financial benefit to the share holders of castrol (india) ltd. .....

Sebi Vs. Shri Satyendra N. Gandhi

Court : SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT

..... he also sought for the evidence based on which sebi have concluded that the entire share capital was lying with him and / or that it has been sold in the market through mr. ..... shri kantibhai patel, chairman, ifsl, had stated on oath, during investigation that the share certificates printed in the office of sri urmilesh gandhi were retained in the custody of shri s.n. ..... gandhi had wrongfully cornered the shares of ifsl and that he had off loaded them in the market for his personal benefit. ..... in the complaint given by s.n.gandhi, it was said that he had no involvement in the sale of the shares which was stated to be by an agreement dated 2.9.95 between wizma consultants (p) ltd. ..... 121 lacs by the promoters in order to satisfy the requirement of promoters contribution.4.6 investigations had also revealed that after printing the share certificate at the company's premises, the share certificates were dispatched only to 36 allottees out of 91 allottees. ..... gandhi had wrongfully cornered the shares of ifsl and was found to have off loaded them in the market for his personal benefit. ..... , a promoter group company, vide agreement dated 22.07.1995 in which it was specifically stated that dipl was holding 5,20,000 equity shares of ifsl which dipl had agreed to sell to wizma. ..... gandhi stating that there were fake / forged shares of the company which had come in for transfer. ..... he was stated to have kept in his custody, shares of ifsl , which were also offloaded in the market.these actions of shri s.n. .....

Amit Sahita Finance Pvt. Ltd. and Vs. Securities and Exchange Board of ...

Court : SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT

..... partnership firm had already paid the fee subject to the condition that the erstwhile partner shall be the whole time director of the corporate entity and the said director continues to hold a minimum of 40% shares of the paid up equity capital in the corporate entity for a period of at least three years from the date of such conversion. ..... sahita by himself did not hold 40% shares in the company but held 60% shares jointly with his wife, and therefore, the company is entitled to the benefit of the continuity in terms of the aforesaid ..... the board by its circular dated 12/9/2002 clarified that the benefit of paragraph 4 of schedule iii would be given to such corporate entities where all the erstwhile partners are whole time directors and jointly hold at least 40% of the paid up equity capital in the corporate ..... also continued to hold 30% shares in the company and amit, the son of deceased held 40% shares.admittedly, m v sahita who was the member of bse held 30% shares in the company and did not satisfy the requirement of paragraph 4 but he, his wife and son held 100% shares in the company. ..... there is no other shareholder in the company.the company claimed benefit of fee continuity in terms of paragraph 4 of schedule iii to the securities and exchange board of india (stock brokers and sub brokers) regulations, 1992 (for short the regulations).this paragraph was introduced in the ..... sahita and his wife yogini sahita each held 30% share capital and the remaining 40% is held by their .....

Vyas Securities Pvt. Ltd. and Vs. Securities and Exchange Board of Ind ...

Court : SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT

Reported in : (2008)85SCL186SAT

..... it is not in dispute that one of the conditions on which a corporate entity could be granted the benefit of the fee paid by the erstwhile individual is that the said individual should be a whole time director of the newly formed corporate entity and that he should continue to hold a minimum of 40% shares of the paid-up equity capital of the corporate body for a period of at least 3 years from the date of corporatization. ..... it was then that the deputy general manager of the board by her order dated 29.3.2007 rejected the claim of the company holding that it was not entitled to claim the benefit of paragraph 4 in schedule iii to the regulations on the ground that pradyuman was not a whole time director of the company. ..... granting exemption from payment of registration fee for the period for which pradyuman had already paid such fee stating that pradyuman being the chairman-cummanaging director of the company held more than 40% shares of its paid-up equity capital and that he continued to hold that position and the percentage of shares for more than 3 years from the date of corporatiziation. ..... it is interesting to note that in identical circumstances the board itself in the case of prs shares and finance pvt. ..... granted the benefit of fee continuity when the erstwhile individual member became the managing director of the corporate entity.5. .....

Rajesh Toshniwal Vs. Securities and Exchange Board of India and Others

Court : SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT

..... acquisition made under regulation 10 or sub-regulation (1) of regulation 11, without making a public announcement under these regulations, acquire, either by himself or through or with persons acting in concert with him, additional shares or voting rights entitling him up to five per cent (5%) voting rights in the target company subject to the following:- (i) the acquisition is made through open market purchase in normal segment on the stock ..... exchange but not through bulk deal /block deal/ negotiated deal/ preferential allotment; or the increase in the shareholding or voting rights of the acquirer is pursuant to a buy-back of shares by the target company; (ii) the post acquisition shareholding of the acquirer together with persons acting in concert with him shall not increase beyond seventy five per cent (75%). ............................ ............................. 20. ..... has acquired, in accordance with the provisions of law, 15 per cent or more but less than fifty five per cent (55%) of the shares or voting rights in a company, shall acquire, either by himself or through or with persons acting in concert with him, additional shares or voting rights entitling him to exercise more than 5 per cent of the voting rights, with post acquisition shareholding or voting rights not ..... addressed a communication to the board claiming that he should be given the benefit of the higher offer price of ` 300 per share since the second acquisition had taken place within 6 months from february .....

Arya Holding Ltd. Vs. P. Sri. Sai Ram, Adjudicating

Court : SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT

..... (c) preferential allotment, made in pursuance of a resolution passed under section 81(1a) of the companies act, 1956 (1 of 1956): (i) board resolution in respect of the proposed preferential allotment is sent to all the stock exchanges on which the shares of the company are listed for being notified on the notice board; (ii) full disclosures of the identity of the class of the proposed allottee(s) is made, and if any of the proposed allottee(s) is to be allotted such number ..... of shares as would increase his holding to 5 per cent or more of the post issued capital, then in such cases, the price at which the allotment is proposed, the identity of such person(s), the purpose of and ..... according to the learned representative the mere statement in the notice that 'the shares which may be issued on preferential allotment basis are likely to be offered for ..... in terms of regulation 3(1)(c) of the securities and exchange board of india (substantial acquisition of shares and takeovers) regulations, 1997 (the regulations) (i) a copy of the board resolution in respect of the proposed preferential allotment is required to be sent to the concerned stock exchange and (ii) also to make certain disclosures relating to ..... not benefited in any way as a result of acquisition as they acquired the shares @ .....