TMI Blog2015 (8) TMI 725X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... asonable or excessive – Appeal dismissed – Decided against Appellant. - Appeal No.179 of 2014 - - - Dated:- 12-9-2014 - J.P. Devadhar, Jog Singh and A. S. Lamba, JJ. For The Appellant : Mr. Abhishek Borgikar, Advocate For The Respondent : Mr. Kumar Desai, Advocate with Mr. Mihir Mody, Advocate Per : Justice J.P. Devadhar (Oral) 1. Appellants are aggrieved by the adjudication order of Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI), dated 25th March, 2014, whereby penalty of ₹ 40 lac is imposed upon the appellants under Section 15H of Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 (for short SEBI Act ) for violating Regulation 10 of Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Ta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and in fact had appointed BCB Brokerage Private Limited as manager to the offer, and this material fact has not been considered in the impugned order. (c) Total acquisition cost of 6,83,717 shares of KCLL is only ₹ 34,18,585/-, whereas, penalty imposed on appellants is ₹ 40 lac which is totally disproportionate. (d) Trading in the shares of KCLL was suspended during the period from 2007 till October 19, 2011. (e) SEBI Takeover Regulations Advisory Committee has published its report on July 19, 2010 wherein it is recommended that the threshold limit be increased to 25% from 15%. (f) As per SEBI (Settlement of Administrative and Civil Proceedings) Regulations, 2014, the total indicative amount for such violation is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to all mitigating factors, penalty of ₹ 40 lac has been imposed instead of imposing penalty of ₹ 25 crore. Fact that the Advisory Committee of SEBI has recommended to increase the threshold limit for triggering violation to 25% from 15% and under SEBI (Settlement of Administrative and Civil Proceedings) Regulations, 2014, the total indicative amount for such violation is ₹ 25 lac only, have no relevance, because of the specific provisions contained in Section 15H of SEBI Act which mandates imposition of higher penalty amounting to ₹ 25 crore. 8. Relying on a decision of this Tribunal in the case of Unijules Life Sciences Ltd. vs. SEBI (Appeal No.142 of 2012 decided on 1/11/2012), it is contended on behalf of appel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
