TMI Blog2012 (11) TMI 1232X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... curities, in any manner, whatsoever, till further orders. Appellant no. 1 is a company registered with the Board as a stock broker since February 2000. Appellant no. 2 is the CEO and Compliance Officer and appellant nos. 3 to 5 are directors of the appellant company. 2. The Board carried out investigations into the Initial Public Offering (IPO) of Tijaria Polypipes Ltd. (the company) and prima-facie found that certain individuals traded in the shares of the company on first day of listing i.e. October 14, 2011 and provided an exit to both qualified institutional buyers and retail investors who were allotted shares in the IPO. According to initial investigations carried out by the Board, these buyers in the IPO were creating artific ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... continuation of the impugned order and inability of the appellants to continue their business in the securities market is causing serious commercial and reputational harm and prejudice to the appellants. It is further submitted that there is nothing in the impugned order or the proceedings, initiated to even remotely suggest that the working of the appellants is to the detriment of the market. It is, therefore, prayed that the directions in the impugned order against the appellants be set aside. 4. During pendency of the appeal, the whole time member of the Board has passed order dated November 5, 2012 under Section 11 and 11B of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 (the Act) confirming the directions issued vide ad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellants. The case of the appellants stands on a different footing as compared to the case of other brokers against whom interim order has been revoked. The investigation in the matter is already over and the Board is likely to issue show cause notice to the appellants within next two weeks. Keeping in view the role played by the appellants in manipulating the IPO of the company, the restraint must continue against the appellants and there is no justification to intervene in the proceedings initiated by the Board. 7. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the arguments advanced by counsel on both sides and also perused the documents placed on record. We have also taken note of the fact that investigation in the matter is a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he had sufficient funds to trade, whereas funds were actually received much later after the trading day. Grishma had allegedly utilized the funds/securities of other clients for making the margin payments of Mr. Jivraj Zala towards his trades. The interim order had mentioned that Grishma s client, Mr. Jivraj Zala had indulged in structured trades/trade reversals with Ms. Lopa. The submissions of Grishma, its directors and CEO do not give any plausible reasoning/explanation for their actions, at this stage. I also note that investigation in the matter has been completed and appropriate action as deemed appropriate, in accordance with law, would be initiated against Grishma, its directors and the CEO. In the light of above facts and circ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
