Court : SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT
Reported in : (2005)4CompLJ166SAT
1. Both these appeals are taken up for final disposal with consent of both parties in the common order.2. The appeal is against the non listing, at the Stock Exchange Mumbai i.e. Respondent No. 2 herein and Hyderabad Stock Exchange i.e.Respondent No. 3 herein of 10 lac Equity Shares and 10 lakh fully convertible warrants of the appellants allotted to the FIIS,/Promoter and also 25 lakh shares allotted to the appellant No. 2 on preferential basis purportedly pursuant to the Order dated 27th November, 2003 passed by the Securities & Exchange Board of India. The said order dated 27th November, 2003 of the Respondent No. 1 is as under: The Executive Director, Hyderabad Stock Exchange , 3-6-Himayatnagar, Hyderabad - 500 Sub: Preferential Aallotment of 25,00,000 Equity shares of Rs.10/-Allotted to Dr. Koteswara Rao of Transgene Biotech Ltd. Please refer to your letter dated May 26, 2003, regarding the captioned subject. The aforesaid matter has been examined in the light of provision of...
Tag this Judgment!Court : SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT
1. Petitioner No. 1, Internet Service Providers Association of India (ISPAI) is a voluntary association of Internet Service Providers (ISPs) in India. Petitioner No. 2, Spectranet Limited, New Delhi and Petitioner No. 3, GTL Limited, Navi Mumbai, are both members of Petitioner No. 1 in addition to several other members. Petitioners No.2 & 3 are companies incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 and having their registered offices at their respective places as mentioned above and are engaged in the business of providing Internet access and services. The petitioners no. 2 & 3 are, therefore, licensees within the meaning of Section 2 (1) (e) of the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act 1997 (in short TRAI Act). The Respondent, the Union of India, is the Licensor of Telecommunication Services within the meaning of Section 2(1)(e)(a) of the Act.2. This petition has been filed by the ISPAI and others under Section 14 (a) (i) read with Section 14 (A) of the Te...
Tag this Judgment!Court : SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT
Reported in : (2006)2CompLJ151TelecomDSAT
1. Videsh Sanchar Nigam Limited (VSNL) has filed this appeal challenging the Tariff Order of Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) dated 8th September 2005, (Telecommunication Tariff [Thirty Ninth Amendment] Order, 2005) whereby TRAI has fixed ceiling tariffs for what are known as IPLC half circuits.2. As mentioned in the Explanatory Memorandum to the said notification, Cable based International Private Leased Circuit (IPLC) offers global connectivity through submarine cable and is stated to be a critical input for the provision of Broadband and Internet Services, International Long Distance Voice Telephony and for a number of key industries like Information Technology (IT) based Business Process Outsourcing (BPO) and Information Technology Enabled Services. These industries play a key role in the economic development of the country and are considered to be quite critical in the future socio- economic development of India. It has therefore been considered important by TRAI that...
Tag this Judgment!Court : SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT
1. In this petition filed under Section 14(a) of the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act, 1997 (for short TRAI Act), first petitioner is the Association of Mobile Service Providers (CMSPs) and petitioners 2 to 15 are its members. There are four respondents. First respondent is the Department of Telecommunications in the Ministry of Communications, Government of India. Second and third respondents BSNL (Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd.) and MTNL (Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd.) are Fixed Service Providers and the 4th respondent is TRAI, the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India constituted under Section 3 of the TRAI Act.Functions of the TRAI are prescribed under Section 11 of the TRAI Act.Two of its functions are (i) to fix the terms and conditions of interconnectivity between the service providers and (ii) to regulate arrangement amongst service providers of sharing their revenue derived from providing telecommunication service. Access to the networks of other service providers is cri...
Tag this Judgment!Court : SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT
Reported in : (2005)3CompLJ544SAT
1. Appeal is taken up with the consent of parties for final disposal.By consent of parties, common orders are passed.2. The appellants being aggrieved by the order of the Adjudicating and Enquiry Officer of SEBI dated 22nd of January 2004 have preferred these appeals.3. By the impugned order, the respondent has imposed a penalty of Rs.30 lakhs on the J.M. Capital Management Pvt. Ltd. (the second appellant herein) and a further sum of Rs.20 lakhs on the J.M. Mutual Fund (the first appellant herein). These penalties were imposed on the appellants for their failure to comply with section 15E and section 15D of SEBI Act.4. Section 15E deals with failure to observe rules and regulations by the asset management company and section 15D deals with defaults in case of mutual funds.5. As stated earlier, the first appellant is the mutual fund and the second appellant is the asset management company. Both the mutual fund as well as the asset management company have been imposed with a penalty of ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT
1. This appeal is directed against the order made by the Chairman, Securities & Exchange Board of India, on 19-7-2001, under Section 11B of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 ('the Act') and regulations 10, 12 and 44 of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations, 1997 ('the Regulations'). By the said order the appellant was directed to make a public offer to the shareholders of Albright & Wilson Chemicals India Ltd. at an offer price taking 14-3-2000 as the base date, and also to pay interest on offer price @ 15 per cent from 14-7-2000 till the actual payment of purchase consideration for the shares tendered in response to the offer.2. For a better understanding of the issues involved, it is felt necessary to have a brief idea of various corporate entities involved and their interconnection/association with each other in the context of the acquisition of Albright & Wilson Chemicals India Ltd., ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT
G.N. Bajpai, Chairman 1. DSQ Software Ltd., formerly known as Square D Software Ltd., (hereinafter 'the company') is a company engaged in Software business.The company was originally incorporated on 6.3.1992 under the name and style of M/s. Square D Software Limited with its registered office at Calcutta. The company later on changed its registered office effective from 16.8.1994 from Calcutta to Chennai and its registered office is at G R Complex, 407-408, Mount Road, Nandanam, Chennai 600 035. Effective from 1.4.1997, the company, changed its name from Square D Software Limited to DSQ Software Limited. The shares of the company are listed on the Stock Exchanges, Mumbai (BSE), National Stock Exchange (NSE), The Calcutta Stock Exchange (CSE), Madras Stock Exchange, Delhi Stock Exchange and Ahmedabad Stock Exchange.2. As per the Prospectus filed with SEBI for its public issue during 1993, the promoters of the company were Shri Dinesh Dalmia and his group concerns viz., a. Ganapati Comm...
Tag this Judgment!Court : SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT
Reported in : (2006)65SCL410SAT
2. The appellant challenges the impugned order dated August 18, 2004 of the Adjudicating Officer appointed by SEBI which inter alia reads as follows: 7.1 Taking into consideration the above facts and circumstances and the factors as contained in section 15J and SAT order dated 18.5.2004 in appeal No.112/02 in the matter of Diamond Projects Pvt. Ltd., vs SEBI, I, in exercise of powers u/s. 15I of SEBI Act hereby impose a penalty of Rs.2 lakhs on the noticee, Shri Sanjay K. Gupta. The noticee should pay the above amount within 45 days on receipt of this order by way of demand draft to SEBI and the same should be forwarded to General Manager, Shri Amarjeet Singh, SEBI, NRO." 3. The impugned order has been issued by the Respondent pursuant to an enquiry held under Rule 3 of SEBI (Procedure for holding enquiry and imposing penalties by Adjudicating Officer) Rules, 1995 in the matter violation of section 15A of SEBI Act for failure to company with the notices/summons etc. 4.1 The appellant ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT
1. Shalibhadra Infosec Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "SIL") was incorporated on April 25, 1994 as a private limited company. It became a public limited company in January 1995. The Directors of SIL as on June 12, 2002 were Raju B. Shah (Chairman), Jitendra R. Doshi, Santosh Gayakwad and Mukesh Vadecha. On January 16, 2002 the company acquired 10,00,000 shares of M/s. Jaisha Holdings Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "JHL") and in return issued 3,00,00,000 equity shares of Rs. 10 each of SIL at par on preferential basis to the shareholders of JHL (swap ratio - 30:1).2. While the issued capital of SIL is 3,50,00,500 shares, only 50,00,500 shares of SIL are listed on the Stock Exchange, Mumbai ("BSE"), Ahmedabad and Vadodara Stock Exchanges. The shares issued on a preferential basis to shareholders of JHL were not listed. Since SIL did not respond to the various Show Cause Notices issued by the BSE on January 9, 2003 it's application for listing 3,00,00,000 shares issued on a preferent...
Tag this Judgment!Court : SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT
1.1 Punjab Communications Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as PunCom) is a public sector company, promoted by Punjab Information and Communication Technology Corporation Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as promoters).PunCom made an offer to buy back from its existing shareholders, upto 40,07,855 equity shares through tender offer, which opened on February 23, 2004 and closed on March 12, 2004. A shareholder of the PunCom Smt.Balbir Kaur, holding 200 equity shares of the PunCom submitted a representation dated March 12, 2004 to SEBI seeking its intervention to prevent the buy back offer on certain grounds. The shareholder also filed a writ petition (no.4945 of 2004) before Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana, inter alia, to direct the PunCom not to proceed further with the buy back offer and quash the said buy back offer, and also to direct SEBI to withdraw and cancel any permission granted by it to the PunCom in the matter. The Hon'ble High Court directed SEBI to decide the representat...
Tag this Judgment!