TMI Blog2020 (2) TMI 1419X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tails of their off-market transactions with an entity which is also found to be part of the group which manipulated the scrip of RMCL. The unwillingness of the appellants in giving the details of those off-market transactions and in turn placing buy orders above LTP in the market subsequently cannot be viewed in isolation. The argument submitted by appellants that no further connection has been established therefore has no merit in the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case. In such matters, the preponderance of probability based on the totality of circumstances, as held by the Apex Court in the matter of Kishore R. Ajmera [2016 (2) TMI 723 - SUPREME COURT ] squarely applies. We note from the impugned order that there ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cate For the Respondent : Mr. Kevic Setalvad, Senior Advocate with Mr. Chirag Bhavsar, Ms Eram Quraishi and Mr. Harshad Vyas, Advocates i/b MDP Partners ORDER Per: Dr. C.K.G. Nair 1. These four appeals have been preferred to challenge the orders of the Whole Time Member ( WTM for convenience) of the Securities and Exchange Board of India ( SEBI for convenience) dated June 04, 2019 and an addendum dated July 30, 2019. By the said order(s) the appellants, among others, have been restrained from dealing in the securities market, directly or indirectly, for a period of 4 years. 2. The order impugned in these appeals have been issued pursuant to an investigation by SEBI in the abnormal price rise in the scrip of Ram M ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion between the noticees/ appellants have been established in terms of off-market transfers in the scrip, company directorships, address and through fund transfers. Accordingly, it is held in the impugned order that the three appellants Giriraj Gupta, Neetu Gupta and Rajeev Kumar Gupta received 1500 shares each off-market from All Time Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. on March 29, 2014. From such off-market transfers a connection is established between the seller and the buyer on the premise that without such connection an off-market transfer is not possible and that too in shares of the same scrip from the same entity. 5. Similarly, it is held in the impugned order that the connections between All Time Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. and three other noticees (A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ellant Rajeev Kumar Ram Prasad Gupta traded on 29 occasions and in a total of 1105 shares. It was also submitted that all these details are also given in Table- 7 (pg. 13 and 14) of the order of the Adjudicating Officer dated July 31, 2019. Similarly, even the alleged LTP contribution is very insignificant in respect of these trades and in the case of the seller Neetu Gupta, no charge of LTP contribution can be attributed because a seller would always wants to sell at maximum possible rates. 7. It was also contended by the learned counsel that seven entities who have traded in similar ways have been let off with a warning by the same impugned order. Hence since the appellants have also traded in miniscule quantities in the normal course ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 19 and Shri Lakhi Prasad Kheradi vs. SEBI (Appeal No. 232 of 2017 decided on 21.06.2018. 9. Though, we note that the appellants have raised the issue of delay, the same is not argued by the learned counsel. Hence we do not propose to go into the issue and deal with only the merit of the matter. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the considered view that the impugned transactions, in the facts and circumstances of the matter, would fall in the realm of violations of PFUTP Regulations. Individual argument that each entity s trade is miniscule and only on a few days alone etc. is not sufficient to rebut the findings in the impugned order. The appellants have not given the details of their off-market transactions wit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f 4 years imposed on the appellants is harsh. 11. In conclusion, we are of the considered view that a warning is sufficient to meet the ends of justice in respect of Neetu Gupta, appellant in Appeal No. 423 of 2019. In Appeal No. 420 of 2019 and 422 of 2019 we reduce the period of restraint from 4 years to 1 year and in Appeal No. 421 of 2019 we reduce the period of restraint from 4 years to 2 years. Directions in the impugned order are modified accordingly. 12. All the appeals are disposed of on above terms with no orders on costs. Consequently, Misc. Application Nos. 521 of 2019, 522 of 2019 524 of 2019 and 88 of 2020 seeking stay and Misc. Application No. 514 of 2019 seeking exemption to file certified copy of the impugned order ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
