Landmark Judgments on SEBI By Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Landmark Judgments on SEBI By Supreme Court of India and High Courts

The Supreme Court and High Courts of India have delivered several landmark judgments that have shaped the powers and functions of SEBI (Securities and Exchange Board of India). Here are some notable examples:

Supreme Court Judgments:

• SEBI v. B. Ramalinga Rao: This case established the validity of SEBI’s power to delegate its adjudicatory functions to full-time board members.
• SEBI v. Sahara India Real Estate Corporation Ltd. : This judgment clarified the scope of insider trading regulations and the concept of “unpublished price sensitive information”
• Balram Garg v. SEBI: Here, the Court emphasized the importance of concrete evidence in insider trading cases. Mere association with someone with access to UPSI wouldn’t be enough for conviction.
• SEBI v. Mega Corpn. Ltd.: This case defined the boundaries of the Supreme Court’s appellate jurisdiction under SEBI Act. The Court can only address legal issues, not factual ones, in appeals from the Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT).

High Court Judgments

High Courts have also played a role in interpreting SEBI regulations. Due to the vast number of High Courts in India, specific cases are harder to pinpoint, but they often deal with matters like:

• Challenging SEBI orders passed against companies or individuals.
• Interpreting specific SEBI regulations.
• Defining the powers of SEBI in certain situations.

Finding More Information

To learn more about specific landmark judgments, you can search legal databases or news articles using terms like “SEBI”, “Supreme Court”, “High Court”, and keywords related to the specific issue you’re interested in.

SEBI Lawyer, SEBI Advocate, Phone Number, Contact Number, Mobile Number

Phone: 09993698595, 07974026721

Ajay Gautam Associates: Advocates & Lawyers

1	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer M/S NORTH EASTERN CHEMICALS INDUSTRIES (P) LTD. & ANR Vs M/S ASHOK PAPER MILL (ASSAM) LTD. & ANR. – [2023] 15 S.C.R. 8212023 INSC 1059 Judge : ABHAY S. OKA,SANJAY KAROL Liquidator, [2017] 10 SCR 199 : (2017) 16 SCC 137; State of Punjab & Ors. v. Bhatinda District Cooperative Milk Producers Union, [2007] 11 SCR 14 : (2007) 11 SCC 363; Securities and Exchange Board of India v. Sunil Krishna Khaitan & Ors., (2023) 2 SCC 643; Jagdish v. State of thereunder and other relevant factors.” The principle stands reiterated in Securities and Exchange Board of India v. Sunil Krishna Khaitan & Ors.30 23.2 In Jagdish v. State of Karnataka31, this Court referred to a number of decisions to reiterate that where the statute in question does Decision Date : 11-12-2023 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/2669/2013 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
2	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer CELIR LLP Vs BAFNA MOTORS (MUMBAI) PVT. LTD. & ORS. – [2023] 13 S.C.R. 532023 INSC 838 Judge : D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,J.B. PARDIWALA Application of other laws not barred.–The provisions of this Act or the rules made thereunder shall be in addition to, and not in derogation of, the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956), the Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1956 (42 of 1956), the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. Three of these Acts, namely, the Companies Act, 1956, the Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1956 and the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992, relate to securities generally, whereas the Decision Date : 21-09-2023 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/5542/2023 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
3	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer PEOPLE’S UNION FOR CIVIL LIBERTIES AND ANR. Vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS. – [2023] 12 S.C.R. 3702023 INSC 833 Judge : D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA,MANOJ MISRA Corporation Limited v Securities and Exchange Board of India (2012) 10 SCC 603: [2012] 12 SCR 256 – referred to. OTHER CASE DETAILS INCLUDING IMPUGNED ORDER AND APPEARANCES CRIMINAL APPELLATE/ORIGINAL/INHERENT JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal No.1255 of 1999. From the Judgment and Order Decision Date : 13-09-2023 | Case No : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1255/1999 | Disposal Nature : Directions issued
4	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer CBI Vs R.R. KISHORE – [2023] 13 S.C.R. 12023 INSC 817 Judge : SANJAY KISHAN KAUL,SANJIV KHANNA,ABHAY S. OKA,VIKRAM NATH,J.K. MAHESHWARI Administration) (1979) 2 SCC 593 : [1979] 2 SCR 816; 5 Soni Devrajbhai Babubhai v. State of Gujarat and Others (1991) 4 SCC 298 : [1991] 3 SCR 812; and Securities and Exchange Board of India v. Ajay Agarwal (2010) 3 SCC 765 : [2010] 3 SCR 70 – referred to. Hopt v. People of the Territory Babubhai Vs. State of Gujarat and Others11; (8) Securities and Exchange Board of India Vs. Ajay Agarwal12; 10.4. Referring to Section 6A of the DSPE Act, it was submitted that the same is not a penal provision and it does not create a new off ence nor does it increase the punishment for an Decision Date : 11-09-2023 | Case No : CRIMINAL APPEAL/377/2007 | Disposal Nature : Matter referred to larger bench | Direction Issue : Matters be placed before appropriate Bench
5	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer EVA AGRO FEEDS PRIVATE LIMITED Vs PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK AND ANR. – [2023] 13 S.C.R. 8612023 INSC 809 Judge : B.V. NAGARATHNA,HON as a director under the Companies Act, 2013 (18 of 2013): [Provided that this clause shall not apply in relation to a connected person referred to in clause (iii) of Explanation I;] (f) is prohibited by the Securities and Exchange Board of India from trading in securities or accessing Decision Date : 06-09-2023 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/7906/2021 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
6	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer THE MADRAS ALUMINIUM CO. LTD. Vs THE TAMIL NADU ELECTRICITY BOARD AND ANR. – [2023] 10 S.C.R. 7422023 INSC 607 Judge : BHUSHAN RAMKRISHNA GAVAI,SANJAY KAROL,ARAVIND KUMAR Securities and Exchange Board of India v. Bhavesh Pabari (2019) 5 SCC 90 – relied on. Ssangyong Engg. & Construction Co. Ltd. v. National Highways Authority of India (2019) 15 SCC 131 : [2019] 7 SCR 522; State of Gujarat v. Patel Raghav Natha (1969) 2 SCC 187 : [1970] 1 SCR 335 – in Adjudicating Officer, Securities and Exchange Board of India v. Bhavesh Pabari8 has observed that: “…There are judgments which hold that when the period of limitation is not prescribed, such power must be exercised within a reasonable time. What would be reasonable time, would Decision Date : 06-07-2023 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/7224/2009 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
7	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer M/S. JERMYN CAPITAL LLC DUBAI Vs CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ORS. – [2023] 6 S.C.R. 5652023 INSC 509 Judge : KRISHNA MURARI,SANJAY KUMAR company is a Foreign Institutional Investor and was permitted by Securities and Exchange Board of India (for short ‘SEBI’) to buy and sell shares and securities in the Indian Stock Market. However, due to certain litigations, the appellant company had quit trading in the Indian markets in 2006. Decision Date : 09-05-2023 | Case No : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1434/2023 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
8	English           हिन्दी – Hindi          తెలుగు – Telugu Disclaimer SANJAY RAGHUNATH AGARWAL Vs THE DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT – [2023] 5 S.C.R. 4612023 INSC 408 Judge : V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN,PANKAJ MITHAL Securities and Exchange Board of India (Prohibition of Fraudulent and Unfair Trade Practices relating to Securities Market) Regulations, 2003. More particularly, SEBI found one Mr. Arun Panchariya and a few others guilty of misleading Indian investors through 14 identical GDR issues Decision Date : 20-04-2023 | Case No : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1198/2023 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
9	English           हिन्दी – Hindi          తెలుగు – Telugu Disclaimer GPSK CAPITAL PRIVATE LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS MANTRI FINANCE LIMITED) Vs THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA – [2023] 2 S.C.R. 7372023 INSC 262 Judge : AJAY RASTOGI,BELA M. TRIVEDI 2 S.C.R. 737 737 GPSK CAPITAL PRIVATE LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS MANTRI FINANCE LIMITED) v. THE Securities and Exchange Board of India (Civil Appeal No(s). 2402 of 2008) MARCH 20, 2023 [AJAY RASTOGI AND BELA M. TRIVEDI, JJ.] Securities and Exchange Board of India 1992: s. 15(Z) – Securities and Exchange Board of India (Stock Brokers and Sub Brokers) Regulations, 1992 – Sch. III, para 4 – Fees continuity benefits under – Entitlement to – Conversion of individual membership into a corporate entity – On facts, a member of Decision Date : 20-03-2023 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/2402/2008 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
10	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer VICTORY IRON WORKS LTD. Vs JITENDRA LOHIA & ANR – [2023] 7 S.C.R. 10212023 INSC 230 Judge : V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN,PANKAJ MITHAL licence, franchise or any other business or commercial right of similar nature, as may be prescribed by the Central Government in consultation with Reserve Bank;” 24. The Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1956, the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 and the Decision Date : 14-03-2023 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/1743/2021 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed | Direction Issue : Appeal partly allowed.
11	English           हिन्दी – Hindi          मराठी – Marathi          తెలుగు – Telugu Disclaimer VISHAL TIWARI Vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS – [2023] 2 S.C.R. 9512023 INSC 191 Judge : D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA,J.B. PARDIWALA framework; and (ii) secure compliance with the existing framework for the protection of investors. 16. The Chairperson of the Securities and Exchange Board of India is requested to ensure that all requisite information is provided to the Committee. All agencies of the Decision Date : 02-03-2023 | Case No : WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)/162/2023 | Disposal Nature : Directions issued
12	English           हिन्दी – Hindi          मराठी – Marathi Disclaimer APARNA AJINKYA FIRODIA Vs AJINKYA ARUN FIRODIA – [2023] 4 S.C.R. 6802023 INSC 146 Judge : V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN,B.V. NAGARATHNA 11 SCR 553; Sharda vs. Dharmpal (2003) 4 SCC 493 : [2003] 3 SCR 106; Sahara India Real Estate Corporation Limited & Ors. vs. Securities and Exchange Board of India & Anr. (2012) 10 SCC 603 : [2012] 12 SCR 256 – referred to. Case Law Reference [2014] 1 SCR 120 distinguished Para 4.5 Decision Date : 20-02-2023 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/1308/2023 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
13	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Vs V SHANKAR – [2023] 6 S.C.R. 4192023 INSC 719 Judge : D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA,J.B. PARDIWALA Securities and Exchange Board of India v. V SHANKAR (Civil Appeal No. 527 of 2023) FEBRUARY 08, 2023 [DR. DHANANJAYA Y CHANDRACHUD, CJI, PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA AND J B PARDIWALA, JJ.] SEBI (Buyback of Securities) Regulations, 1998 – to the Tribunal for fresh consideration in the light of the interpretation as aforesaid– Securities and Exchange Board of India Act 1992 – s.12A(a), (b) & (c), s.15HA – Companies Act 1956 – ss.68, 77A – Securities and Exchange Board of India (Prohibition of Fraudulent and Unfair [2023] 6 Decision Date : 08-02-2023 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/527/2023 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
14	English           हिन्दी – Hindi          मराठी – Marathi Disclaimer DEEPAK ANANDA PATIL Vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS – [2023] 5 S.C.R. 7172023 INSC 11 Judge : D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA against whom it is sought to be utilized has been apprised of it and given an opportunity to respond to it – Principles of Natural Justice. T. Takano v. Securities and Exchange Board of India (2022) 8 SCC 162; Managing Director, ECIL, Hyderabad v B. Karunakar (1993) 4 SCC 727 : [1993] 2 Suppl. Decision Date : 04-01-2023 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/88/2023 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
15	English           हिन्दी – Hindi          తెలుగు – Telugu Disclaimer IFB AGRO INDUSTRIES LIMITED Vs SICGIL INDIA LIMITED AND OTHERS – [2023] 1 S.C.R. 5272023 INSC 9 Judge : A.S. BOPANNA,PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA regulator to determine a violation of the provisions of the SEBI Act and the Regulations – NCLT exceeded its jurisdiction – Thus, the appellant was correct in setting aside the order of the NCLT – Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Regulations, 1997 – reg. 7(1) – Securities and Exchange Board of India (Prohibition of Insider Trading) Regulations, 1992 – reg. 13 – Companies Act, 1956 – s. 111A. A B C D E F G H 528 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2023] 1 S.C.R. Dismissing the appeal, the Court HELD: 1.1 The rectificatory Decision Date : 04-01-2023 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/2030/2019 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
16	KAUSHAL KISHOR Vs STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS. – [2023] 8 S.C.R. 5812023 INSC 4 Judge : S. ABDUL NAZEER,BHUSHAN RAMKRISHNA GAVAI,A.S. BOPANNA,V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN,B.V. NAGARATHNA statement, any act of omission or commission is done by the officers resulting in harm or loss to a person/citizen, then the same may be actionable as a constitutional tort”. [Para 153, 154][715-F-H; 716-A, B] Sahara India Real Estate Corporation Limited v. Securities and Exchange Board of India Decision Date : 03-01-2023 | Case No : WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL)/113/2016 | Disposal Nature : Reference answered
17	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer KARNATAKA POWER TRANSMISSION CORPORATION LIMITED Vs JSW ENERGY LIMITED (EARLIER KNOWN AS JINDAL THERMAL POWER COMPANY LIMITED & JINDAL TRACTABEL POWER COMPANY LIMITED) & ORS. – [2022] 12 S.C.R. 9372022 INSC 1219 Judge : K.M. JOSEPH,ANIRUDDHA BOSE,HRISHIKESH ROY ENERGY LTD. (EARLIER KNOWN AS JINDAL THERMAL POWER CO. LTD. & JINDAL TRACTABEL POWER CO. LTD.) & ORS. A B C D E F G H 942 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2022] 12 S.C.R. 1968 SC 1028 : [1968] 3 SCR 387; and Securities and Exchange Board of India v. Mega Corporation Decision Date : 22-11-2022 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/8714/2022 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
18	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer CDR AMIT KUMAR SHARMA ETC Vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS ETC – [2022] 18 S.C.R. 6252022 INSC 1124 Judge : D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,HIMA KOHLI SCR 832, T. Takano v. Securities and Exchange Board of India Civil Appeal Nos. 487-488 of 2022 – relied on. A B C D E F G H 627 Union of India v. Lieutenant Commander Annie Nagaraj (2020) 13 SCC 1 : [2020] 10 SCR 433; Lt. Col. Nitisha v. Union of India (2021) SCCOnLine SC 261 : Decision Date : 20-10-2022 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/841/2022 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
19	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF GIFT TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II Vs M/S BPL LIMITED – [2022] 14 S.C.R. 9382022 INSC 1077 Judge : SANJIV KHANNA,J.K. MAHESHWARI by the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI), there is a complete bar on transfer, which is enforced by inscribing the words “not transferable” in the relevant share certificates. This position is accepted by the A B C D E F G H 941 Revenue, which, however, has relied upon current transactions in respect of these shares made in the ordinary course of business. 6. When the equity shares are in a lock-in period, then as per the guidelines issued by the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI), there is a complete bar on transfer, which is enforced Decision Date : 13-10-2022 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/3265/2016 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
20	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Vs NATIONAL STOCK EXCHANGE MEMBERS ASSOCIATION AND ANR – [2022] 14 S.C.R. 9112022 INSC 1076 Judge : AJAY RASTOGI,B.V. NAGARATHNA Securities and Exchange Board of India v. NATIONAL STOCK EXCHANGE MEMBERS ASSOCIATION AND ANR (Civil Appeal No. 435 of 2007) OCTOBER 13, 2022 [AJAY RASTOGI AND B. V. NAGARATHNA, JJ.] Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 – s.12(1) – Whether in stock broker which is in conformity with the scheme of Regulations 1992 – Securities and Exchange Board of India (Stock Brokers and Sub-Brokers) Rules, 1992 – Securities and Exchange Board of India (Stock Brokers and Sub-Brokers) Regulations, 1992. Interpretation of Statutes – True intention of Decision Date : 13-10-2022 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/435/2007 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
21	English           ગુજરાતી – Gujarati          हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer JIGAR @ JIMMY PRAVINCHANDRA ADATIYA Vs STATE OF GUJARAT – [2022] 13 S.C.R. 3672022 INSC 1013 Judge : AJAY RASTOGI,ABHAY S. OKA Private Limited & Ors. v. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr. (2021) 2 SCC 525 : 2020 (11 ) JT 10; Securities and Exchange Board of India Etc. v. Gaurav Varshney & Anr. Etc. (2016) 14 SCC 430 : [2016] 7 SCR 1; Devinderpal Singh v. Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (1996) 1 Decision Date : 23-09-2022 | Case No : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1656/2022 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
22	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Vs ABHIJIT RAJAN – [2022] 9 S.C.R. 6692022 INSC 979 Judge : INDIRA BANERJEE,V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN Securities and Exchange Board of India v. ABHIJIT RAJAN (Civil Appeal No. 563 of 2020) SEPTEMBER 19, 2022 [INDIRA BANERJEE AND V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN, JJ.] Securities and Exchange Board of India (Prohibition of Insider Trading) Regulations, 1992 – Regulation 3(i) Regulation 4 – Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 – ss. 12A (d), 12A (e),15Z and 30 – Insider trading – Price sensitive information – Whether information regarding decision of the Board of Directors of GIPL to terminate the contracts in question can be characterized as Decision Date : 19-09-2022 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/563/2020 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
23	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer KAVI ARORA Vs SECURITIES & EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA – [2022] 19 S.C.R. 3232022 INSC 959 Judge : INDIRA BANERJEE,A.S. BOPANNA ARORA v. SECURITIES & EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA (Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 15149 of 2021) SEPTEMBER 14, 2022 [INDIRA BANERJEE AND A. S. BOPANNA, JJ.] Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 – s.15HA – Securities and Exchange Board of India India 2014(1) MahLJ 838; Amit Jain v. Securities and Exchange Board of India and Another 2018 SCC Online Del 9784 – referred to. Case Law Reference [2010] 13 SCR 99 relied on Para 27, 28 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 15149 of 2021. From the Judgment Decision Date : 14-09-2022 | Case No : SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL)/15149/2021 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
24	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer DKG BUILDCON PRIVATE LTD Vs THE ADJUDICATING & ENQUIRY OFFICER, S.E.B.I. – [2022] 19 S.C.R. 2422022 INSC 960 Judge : AJAY RASTOGI,B.V. NAGARATHNA SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2022] 19 S.C.R.[2022] 19 S.C.R. 242 242 DKG BUILDCON PRIVATE LTD. v. THE ADJUDICATING & ENQUIRY OFFICER, S.E.B.I. (Civil Appeal No. 1742 of 2009) SEPTEMBER 14, 2022 [AJAY RASTOGI AND B. V. NAGARATHNA, JJ.] Securities and Exchange Board of India appellants and other entities, and the non-cooperative attitude of the appellants during the course of the investigation in attempting to obstruct the same, the quantum of penalty imposed u/s.15A(a) is justified and with effective consideration of the factors listed in s.15J. Securities and Exchange Board of India Decision Date : 14-09-2022 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/1742/2009 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
25	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Vs RAJKUMAR NAGPAL & ORS – [2022] 15 S.C.R. 12022 INSC 885 Judge : D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,SURYA KANT,A.S. BOPANNA [2022] 15 S.C.R. 1 1 Securities and Exchange Board of India v. RAJKUMAR NAGPAL & ORS. (Civil Appeal No. 5247 of 2022) AUGUST 30, 2022 [DR. DHANANJAYA Y CHANDRACHUD, SURYA KANT AND A. S. BOPANNA, JJ.] SEBI (Debenture Trustees) Regulations 1993 – 430 is not attracted. [Paras 65-66][43-E-H] The SEBI Circular is applicable if debenture holders wish to implement a Resolution Plan to which the lenders are a party. Securities and Exchange Board of India v. RAJKUMAR NAGPAL A B C D E F G H 4 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2022] 15 Decision Date : 30-08-2022 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/5247/2022 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
26	English           हिन्दी – Hindi          मराठी – Marathi Disclaimer RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LIMITED Vs SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA & ORS. – [2022] 15 S.C.R. 7302022 INSC 796 Judge : N.V. RAMANA,J.K. MAHESHWARI,HIMA KOHLI SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2022] 15 S.C.R. RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LIMITED v. Securities and Exchange Board of India & ORS. (Criminal Appeal No. 1167 of 2022) AUGUST 05, 2022 [N. V. RAMANA, CJI, J. K. MAHESHWARI AND HIMA KOHLI, JJ.] Companies Act, 1956 – s.77 – by SEBI to determine culpability – SEBI’s attempt to cherrypick the documents, it proposes to disclose, derogates the commitment to a fair trial – The respondents were directed to furnish copy of the above referred documents to appellant – Securities and Exchange Board of India Decision Date : 05-08-2022 | Case No : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1167/2022 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
27	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer VIJAY MADANLAL CHOUDHARY & ORS. Vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS. – [2022] 6 S.C.R. 3822022 INSC 757 Judge : A.M. KHANWILKAR,DINESH MAHESHWARI,C.T. RAVIKUMAR Excise and Ors. (1992) 3 SCC 259 : [1992] 3 SCR 247; State of Gujarat v. Shyamlal Mohanlal Choksi AIR 1965 SC 1251 : [1965] 2 SCR 457; Keshavan Madhava Menon v. The State of Bombay AIR 1951 SC 128 : [1951] SCR 228; Ritesh Agarwal & Anr. v. Securities and Exchange Board of India & Ors. (2008) Decision Date : 27-07-2022 | Case No : SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL)/4634/2014 | Disposal Nature : Reference answered | Direction Issue : Issues Answered
28	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Vs SUNIL KRISHNA KHAITAN AND OTHERS – [2022] 18 S.C.R. 9872022 INSC 669 Judge : SANJIV KHANNA,BELA M. TRIVEDI [2022] 18 S.C.R. 987 987 Securities and Exchange Board of India v. SUNIL KRISHNA KHAITAN AND OTHERS (Civil Appeal No. 8249 of 2013) JULY 11, 2022 [SANJIV KHANNA AND BELA M. TRIVEDI, JJ.] SEBI (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations, provision –Nowhere, Regulation 45 stipulates that in case of violation of Regulations 10, 11 or 12 of A B C D E F G H 988 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2022] 18 S.C.R. the Takeover Regulations 1997, the Board must initiate action and issue directions in terms of Regulation 44. Securities and Exchange Board of India Decision Date : 11-07-2022 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/8249/2013 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
29	English           हिन्दी – Hindi          தமிழ் – Tamil Disclaimer MBL AND COMPANY LIMITED Vs SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA – [2022] 4 S.C.R. 8172022 INSC 628 Judge : D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,BELA M. TRIVEDI AND COMPANY LIMITED v. Securities and Exchange Board of India (Civil Appeal Nos. 4262-4263 of 2022) MAY 26, 2022 [DR DHANANJAYA Y CHANDRACHUD AND BELA M TRIVEDI, JJ.] Securities and Exchange Board of India Act 1992: ss. 12(A) (a), (b), (c), ss. 15Z, wealth. The order which has been passed by the WTM cannot be regarded as disproportionate so as to result in the interference of this Court in the exercise of its jurisdiction u/s. 15Z of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act 1992. Moreover, the WTM has prohibited the appellant Decision Date : 26-05-2022 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/4262/2022 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
30	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer PTC INDIA FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITED Vs VENKATESWARLU KARI AND ANOTHER – [2022] 9 S.C.R. 10632022 INSC 562 Judge : M.R. SHAH,SANJIV KHANNA [2022] 9 S.C.R. 1063 1063 PTC INDIA FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITED v. VENKATESWARLU KARI AND ANOTHER (Civil Appeal No. 5443 of 2019) MAY 12, 2022 [M. R. SHAH AND SANJIV KHANNA, JJ.] Contract Act, 1872 – Depositories Act, 1996 – Securities and Exchange Board of India and Participants) Regulations, 1996 – Whether the Depositories Act, 1996 read with the Regulation 58 of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Depositories and Participants) Regulations, 19961 has the legal effect of overwriting the provisions relating to the contracts Decision Date : 12-05-2022 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/5443/2019 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
31	English           हिन्दी – Hindi          मराठी – Marathi Disclaimer THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs 63 MOONS TECHNOLOGIES LTD. – [2022] 10 S.C.R. 4652022 INSC 465 Judge : D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,SURYA KANT,BELA M. TRIVEDI of debenture, bond or any other instrument covered under the guidelines given, and regulations made, by the SEBI, established under the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992; (ii) amounts contributed as capital by partners of a firm; (iii) amounts received from a scheduled bank r Decision Date : 22-04-2022 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/2748/2022 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
32	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer BALRAM GARG Vs SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA – [2022] 4 S.C.R. 8882022 INSC 442 Judge : VINEET SARAN,ANIRUDDHA BOSE SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2022] 4 S.C.R.[2022] 4 S.C.R. 888 888 BALRAM GARG v. Securities and Exchange Board of India (Civil Appeal No. 7054 OF 2021) APRIL 19, 2022 [VINEET SARAN AND ANIRUDDHA BOSE, JJ.] SEBI (Prevention of Insider Trading Regulations), – Regulation 2(1)(d) and 2(1)(f) – Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 – ss.11(2)(g), 11(4), 12A(c), 15G and 15Z – Insider Trading – On receipt of Unpublished Price Sensitive Information (UPSI) – “Connected persons” and “immediate relatives” – Respondent/SEBI alleging that P.C. Decision Date : 19-04-2022 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/7054/2021 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
33	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer NOEL HARPER & ORS. Vs UNION OF INDIA & ANR. – [2022] 19 S.C.R. 8792022 INSC 411 Judge : A.M. KHANWILKAR,DINESH MAHESHWARI,C.T. RAVIKUMAR Ramlila Maidan Incident, In re (2012) 5 SCC 1 : [2012] 4 SCR 971; Sahara India Real Estate Corporation Limited & Ors. v. Securities and Exchange Board of India & Anr. (2012) 10 SCC 603 : [2012] 12 SCR 256; Excel Crop Care Limited v. Competition Commission of India & Anr. (2017) 8 SCC 47 : Chintamanrao & Anr. vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh103; The State of Madras vs. V.G. Row104; Teri Oat Estates (P) Ltd. vs. U.T., Chandigarh & Ors.105; Ramlila Maidan Incident, In re106; Sahara India Real Estate Corporation Limited & Ors. vs. Securities and Exchange Board of India & Anr.107; Decision Date : 08-04-2022 | Case No : WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)/566/2021 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
34	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Vs MEGA CORPORATION LIMITED – [2022] 2 S.C.R. 5462022 INSC 344 Judge : L. NAGESWARA RAO,PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2022] 2 S.C.R.[2022] 2 S.C.R. 546 546 Securities and Exchange Board of India v. MEGA CORPORATION LIMITED (Civil Appeal No. 2104 of 2009) MARCH 25, 2022 [L. NAGESWARA RAO AND PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, JJ.] Securities and Exchange Board of India Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 – s 15Z – Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court – Scope of – The Court will exercise jurisdiction only when there is a question of law arising for consideration from the decision of the Tribunal which may arise when there is erroneous construction of Decision Date : 25-03-2022 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/2104/2009 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
35	English           हिन्दी – Hindi          मराठी – Marathi Disclaimer T. TAKANO Vs SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA & ANR. – [2022] 16 S.C.R. 2122022 INSC 208 Judge : D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,SANJIV KHANNA SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2022] 16 S.C.R. T. TAKANO v. Securities and Exchange Board of India & ANR. (Civil Appeal Nos. 487-488 of 2022) FEBRUARY 18, 2022 [DR DHANANJAYA Y CHANDRACHUD AND SANJIV KHANNA, JJ.] Securities and Exchange Board of India Act 1992 receive sensitive information regarding third parties and unrelated transactions that may form part of the investigation report. [Para 52][258-B-C] Chandrama Tewari v. Union of India (1988) 1 SCR 1102 : [1988] SCR 1102; Natwar Singh v. Director of T. TAKANO v. Securities and Exchange Board of India & Decision Date : 18-02-2022 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/487/2022 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
36	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer ECGC LIMITED Vs MOKUL SHRIRAM EPC JV – [2022] 2 S.C.R. 1552022 INSC 188 Judge : HEMANT GUPTA,V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN 2021 SCC OnLine SC 225; New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Smt. Shanti Misra (1975) 2 SCC 840 [1976] 2 SCR 266; Videocon International Limited v. Securities and Exchange Board of India (2015) 4 SCC 33 : [2015] 3 SCR 1; Maria Cristina De Souza Sodder & Ors. v. Amria Zurana Pereira Pinto & Decision Date : 15-02-2022 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/1842/2021 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
37	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer M/S. NEWTECH PROMOTERS AND DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. Vs STATE OF UP & ORS. ETC. – [2021] 9 S.C.R. 9092021 INSC 716 Judge : UDAY UMESH LALIT,AJAY RASTOGI,ANIRUDDHA BOSE Employees State Insurance Corporation (1994) 5 SCC 346 : [1994] 1 Suppl. SCR 626; Jagannath Temple Managing Committee vs. Siddha Math and Others (2015) 16 SCC 542; Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange Ltd. vs. Securities and Exchange Board of India and Another (2012) 13 SCC 501; State of Uttar Pradesh Decision Date : 11-11-2021 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/6745/2021 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
38	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer ADANI GAS LIMITED Vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS. – [2021] 13 S.C.R. 11462021 INSC 558 Judge : UDAY UMESH LALIT,S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HRISHIKESH ROY Sons (P) Ltd. v. Union of India (2015) 4 SCC 770 : [2015] 2 SCR 51; Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd v. Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (2014) 3 SCC 222 : [2013] 12 SCR 999; Prakash Gupta v. Securities and Exchange Board of India (2021) SCC OnLine SC 485; M. C. Mehta v. Union of India Decision Date : 28-09-2021 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/6008/2021 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
39	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer PRAKASH GUPTA Vs SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA – [2021] 4 S.C.R. 8622021 INSC 353 Judge : D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,M.R. SHAH SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 4 S.C.R. [2021] 4 S.C.R. 862 862 PRAKASH GUPTA v. Securities and Exchange Board of India (Criminal Appeal No 569 Of 2021) JULY 23, 2021 [DR. DHANANJAYA Y CHANDRACHUD AND M. R. SHAH, JJ.] Securities and Exchange Board of India of, by the trial judge upholding the objection of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) that the offence could not be compounded without its consent – Upheld by the High Court holding that the trial has reached the stage of final arguments and the application for compounding Decision Date : 23-07-2021 | Case No : CRIMINAL APPEAL/569/2021 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
40	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer FRANKLIN TEMPLETON TRUSTEE SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED AND ANOTHER Vs AMRUTA GARG AND OTHERS ETC. – [2021] 5 S.C.R. 5592021 INSC 333 Judge : S. ABDUL NAZEER,SANJIV KHANNA [2021] 5 S.C.R. 559 559 FRANKLIN TEMPLETON TRUSTEE SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED AND ANOTHER v. AMRUTA GARG AND OTHERS ETC. (Civil Appeal No. 498-501 of 2021) JULY 14, 2021 [S ABDUL NAZEER AND SANJIV KHANNA, JJ.] Securities and Exchange Board of India the trustees would stand, but the consent of the unitholders is a pre-requisite for winding up – Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992. Constitutional validity of 1996 Regulations – Held: Regulations of 1996 do not suffer from the vice of manifest arbitrariness – Since Decision Date : 14-07-2021 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/498/2021 | Disposal Nature : Directions issued
41	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer INDUS BIOTECH PRIVATE LIMITED Vs KOTAK INDIA VENTURE (OFFSHORE) FUND (EARLIER KNOWN AS KOTAK INDIA VENTURE LIMITED) & ORS. – [2021] 7 S.C.R. 1122021 INSC 216 Judge : S.A. BOBDE,A.S. BOPANNA,V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN Qualified Initial Public Offering (‘QIPO’ for short). However, under Regulation 5(2) of Securities and Exchange Board of India (Issue of Capital and Disclosure Requirements), Regulations 2018 (‘SEBI Regulations’ for short), a company which has any outstanding convertible securities or any other Decision Date : 26-03-2021 | Case No : WRIT TO PETITION (CIVIL)…/48/2019 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
42	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer NEENA ANEJA & ANR. Vs JAI PRAKASH ASSOCIATES LTD. – [2021] 15 S.C.R. 962021 INSC 189 Judge : D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,M.R. SHAH Electricity Board (2014) 5 SCC 219 : [2013]11 SCR 915; Videocon International Limited v. Securities and Exchange Board of India (2015) 4 SCC 33 : [2015] 3 SCR 1; Securities and Exchange of Board of India v. Classic Credit Limited (2018) 13 SCC 1 : [2017] 13 SCR 559; Swapna Mohanty v. State of Decision Date : 16-03-2021 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/3766/2020 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
43	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer ARUN KUMAR JAGATRAMKA Vs JINDAL STEEL AND POWER LTD. & ANR. – [2021] 3 S.C.R. 1142021 INSC 187 Judge : D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,M.R. SHAH SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 3 S.C.R. (f) is prohibited by the Securities and Exchange Board of India from trading in securities or accessing the securities markets; (g) has been a promoter or in the management or control of a corporate debtor in which a preferential of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (54 of 2002); (e) an Alternate Investment Fund registered with the Securities and Exchange Board of India ; (f) such categories of persons as may be notified by the Central Government.” (emphasis supplied) Due to Decision Date : 15-03-2021 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/9664/2019 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
44	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer P. MOHANRAJ & ORS. Vs M/S. SHAH BROTHERS ISPAT PVT. LTD. – [2021] 14 S.C.R. 2042021 INSC 133 Judge : R.F. NARIMAN,NAVIN SINHA,K.M. JOSEPH of financial sector and includes the Reserve Bank of India, the Securities and Exchange Board of India , the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India, the Pension Fund Regulatory Authority and such other regulatory authorities as may be notified by the Decision Date : 01-03-2021 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/10355/2018 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
45	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer A. NAVINCHANDRA STEELS PRIVATE LIMITED Vs SREI EQUIPMENT FINANCE LIMITED & ORS. – [2021] 3 S.C.R. 5972021 INSC 128 Judge : R.F. NARIMAN,BHUSHAN RAMKRISHNA GAVAI the Companies Act, the Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1956, the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 and the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993. It is clear that the first three Acts deal with securities generally and the Recovery Decision Date : 01-03-2021 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/4230/2020 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
46	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer FRANKLIN TEMPLETON TRUSTEE SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED AND ANOTHER Vs AMRUTA GARG AND OTHERS ETC – [2021] 14 S.C.R. 5732021 INSC 87 Judge : S. ABDUL NAZEER,SANJIV KHANNA TEMPLETON TRUSTEE SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED AND ANOTHER v. AMRUTA GARG AND OTHERS ETC. (Civil Appeal Nos. 498-501 of 2021) FEBRUARY 12, 2021 [S. ABDUL NAZEER AND SANJIV KHANNA, JJ.] Securities and Exchange Board of India (Mutual Funds) Regulations, the effect thereof, not examined. Securities and Exchange Board of India (Mutual Funds) Regulations, 1996 – Regulation 18(15) (c) – Mutual Fund Schemes – Winding up of – Consent of unitholders – Plea of the objecting unitholders that consent would be binding only on those who have consented Decision Date : 12-02-2021 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/498/2021 | Disposal Nature : Directions issued | Direction Issue : Directing winding up and disbursements, the Court
47	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer INDIAN COMMODITY EXCHANGE LIMITED Vs NEPTUNE OVERSEAS LIMITED & ORS. – [2020] 13 S.C.R. 1292020 INSC 663 Judge : SANJAY KISHAN KAUL,HRISHIKESH ROY Securities and Exchange Board of India (for short ‘SEBI’) with effect from 28.9.2015. 6. The genesis of the dispute is a communication dated 28.11.2010, made by a stated independent journalist to the FMC alleging, inter alia, trading irregularities within the NMCE along with an allegation The appeals before this Court have emanated under Section 15Z of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 – Civil Appeal No.9037 of 2019 having been filed by the Indian Commodity Exchange Limited (the successor of NMCE) while Civil Appeal No.629 of 2020 is by the SEBI, the Decision Date : 27-11-2020 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/9037/2019 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
48	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer RUSODAY SECURITIES LTD. Vs NATIONAL STOCK EXCHANGE OF INDIA LTD. & ORS. – [2020] 13 S.C.R. 2182020 INSC 650 Judge : A.M. KHANWILKAR,DINESH MAHESHWARI the Byelaws and Rules of the Exchange necessitating unto termination – National Stock Exchange Byelaws, 1994 – Clauses (10), (17) and (18); Chapter IX Clauses (5), (6) and (24) – Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 – National Securities Clearing Corporation Ltd. Byelaws – the 1956 Act, Rules and Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992. The definition is merely an inclusive definition RUSODAY SECURITIES LTD. v. NATIONAL STOCK EXCHANGE OF INDIA LTD. A B C D E F G H 222 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2020] 13 S.C.R. and not exhaustive. The Decision Date : 20-11-2020 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/2690/2009 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
49	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF Vs UDAYANT MALHOUTRA – [2020] 14 S.C.R. 3272020 INSC 647 Judge : D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,INDU MALHOTRA,INDIRA BANERJEE [2020] 14 S.C.R. 327 Securities and Exchange Board of India v. UDAYANT MALHOUTRA (Civil Appeal Nos. 2981-2982 of 2020) NOVEMBER 18, 2020 [DR. DHANANJAYA Y CHANDRACHUD, INDU MALHOTRA AND INDIRA BANERJEE, JJ.] Securities and Exchange Board of India Act 1992 – which has been placed by the Tribunal on the powers of SEBI shall not be 327 A B C D E F G H 328 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2020] 14 S.C.R. cited as a precedent in any other case – Accordingly, appeals are disposed of. North End Foods Marketing Pvt Ltd v Securities and Exchange Board of India Decision Date : 18-11-2020 | Case No : WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL)/2981/2020 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
50	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Vs M/S G S CHATHA RICE MILLS & ANR. – [2020] 14 S.C.R. 5712020 INSC 561 Judge : D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,INDU MALHOTRA,K.M. JOSEPH 2000 SC 811 : [2000] 1 SCR 518; Securities and Exchange Board of India v. Magnum Equity Services Ltd. (2015) 16 SCC 721; M.D. Overseas Industries v. Union of India W.P. (C) 7838/2017 decided on 15 October 2019 (Delhi High Court); Ruchi Soya Industries v. Union of India W.P. No. 21207 of Decision Date : 23-09-2020 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/3249/2020 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
51	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer SUBORNO BOSE Vs ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE & ANR. – [2020] 4 S.C.R. 602020 INSC 278 Judge : A.M. KHANWILKAR,DINESH MAHESHWARI Ernakulam (1989) 3 SCC 52 : [1989] 2 SCR 1000; Securities and Exchange Board of India v. Cabot International Capital Corporation (2005) 123 Comp Cas 841 (Bom) – referred to. Corpus Juris Secundum, Vol. 85, page 580, paragraph 1023 – referred to. Case Law Reference [2006] 2 Suppl. SCR Tax, Kerala, Ernakulam3, which had opined that the intention of the legislature such as the one under consideration is to emphasise the fact of loss of revenue and to provide a remedy for such loss, although element of coercion is present in the penalty. In Securities and Exchange Board of India Decision Date : 05-03-2020 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/6267/2020 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
52	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer INTERNET AND MOBILE ASSOCIATION OF INDIA Vs RESERVE BANK OF INDIA – [2020] 2 S.C.R. 2972020 INSC 264 Judge : R.F. NARIMAN,ANIRUDDHA BOSE,V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN for purposes other than that of creating or trading in crypto-currencies. 2.15. In August 2017, Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) established a 10-member advisory panel to examine global fintech developments and report on opportunities for the Indian securities market. The Decision Date : 04-03-2020 | Case No : WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)/528/2018 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
53	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer SURESH CHAND AND ANR. Vs SURESH CHANDER (D) THR LRS. AND ORS. – [2020] 3 S.C.R. 8912020 INSC 212 Judge : D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,AJAY RASTOGI Jain Appeal dismissed. A B C D E F G H 903 OSIANS CONNOISSEURS OF ART PVT. LTD. v. Securities and Exchange Board of India & ANR. (Civil Appeal No. 54 of 2016) FEBRUARY 12, 2020 [R. F. NARIMAN, S. RAVINDRA BHAT AND V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN, JJ ] Securities and Exchange Board of India Securities and Exchange Board of India (hereinafter referred to as ‘SEBI’) first apprised the appellants, who are the trustees of these two Trusts Funds stating that, as these Funds were Collective Investment Schemes, they should apply for certificates of registration insofar as these Decision Date : 19-02-2020 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/482/2020 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
54	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, INDIAN BANK Vs D. VISALAKSHI AND ANR. – [2019] 13 S.C.R. 1772019 INSC 1067 Judge : A.M. KHANWILKAR,DINESH MAHESHWARI Securities and Exchange Board of India Act 1992 (15 of 1992), the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (51 of 1993) or any other law for the time being in force.” 37. There can be no manner of doubt that words “any other law for time being in force” used in Section 37 Contract Act 1872; Transfer of Property Act, 1882; the Companies Act, 1956; the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992; and which are not inconsistent with the definition given in the 2002 Act. It also noted that the authority referred to in Section 14 is not expected to Decision Date : 23-09-2019 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/6295/2015 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
55	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer SURINDER SINGH DESWAL @ COL. S.S. DESWAL AND OTHERS Vs VIRENDER GANDHI – [2019] 8 S.C.R. 7462019 INSC 688 Judge : M.R. SHAH,A.S. BOPANNA the appellants to deposit the amount as directed by the first appellate court. [Paras 10, 11] [759-D-E; 760-A-B] Garikapatti Veeraya v. N. Subbiah Choudhury AIR 1957 SC 540 : [1957] SCR 488 ; Videocon International Limited v. Securities and Exchange Board of India (2015) 4 SCC 33 : [2015] Choudhury, reported in AIR 1957 SC 540; and Videocon International Limited v. Securities and Exchange Board of India , reported in (2015) 4 SCC 33. 5.4 It is further submitted by the learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellants that even otherwise in the present case, Decision Date : 29-05-2019 | Case No : CRIMINAL APPEAL/917/2019 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
56	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer MOONS TECHNOLOGIES LTD. (FORMERLY KNOWN AS FINANCIAL TECHNOLOGIES INDIA LTD.) & ORS. Vs UNION OF INDIA – [2019] 8 S.C.R. 262019 INSC 597 Judge : R.F. NARIMAN,VINEET SARAN particular shareholder of NSEL. On 28.08.2015, the Central Government issued a notification to merge the functions of the FMC with the Securities and Exchange Board of India [“SEBI”] w.e.f. 28.09.2015. On the same day, the FCRA was also repealed. Thus, SEBI was now vested with the powers of which is to be governed by the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 [“SEBI Act”]. 8. FTIL and NSEL were granted a hearing on their objections to the impugned draft amalgamation order by a committee consisting of Shri Pritam Singh, Additional Secretary to the Government of India, Decision Date : 30-04-2019 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/4476/2019 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
57	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer KHODAY DISTILLERIES LTD. (NOW KNOWN AS KHODAY INDIA LIMITED) AND OTHERS Vs SRI MAHADESHWARA SAHAKARA SAKKARE KARKHANE LTD., KOLLEGAL (UNDER LIQUIDATION) REPRESENTED BY THE LIQUIDATOR – [2019] 3 S.C.R. 4112019 INSC 298 Judge : A.K. SIKRI,S. ABDUL NAZEER,M.R. SHAH confer on aggrieved parties right of appeal to the Supreme Court in contradistinction with the powers conferred on the Supreme Court under Article 136 of the Constitution, for instance, Section 15-Z of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) Act, 1992 confers a right of appeal to Decision Date : 01-03-2019 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/2432/2019 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
58	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer ADJUDICATING OFFICER, SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Vs BHAVESH PABARI – [2019] 18 S.C.R. 8982019 INSC 289 Judge : RANJAN GOGOI,DEEPAK GUPTA,SANJIV KHANNA SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2019] 18 S.C.R. ADJUDICATING OFFICER, Securities and Exchange Board of India v. BHAVESH PABARI (Civil Appeal No.11311 of 2013) FEBRUARY 28, 2019 [RANJAN GOGOI, CJI, DEEPAK GUPTA AND SANJIV KHANNA, JJ.] Securities and Exchange Board of India of s.15-J which can be taken note of by the Adjudicating Officer while determining the quantum of penalty. 898 [2019] 18 S.C.R. 898 A B C D E F G H 899 Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 – s.15-J, Cl. (a), (b) & (c) and ss.15-A to 15-HA – Whether Decision Date : 28-02-2019 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/11311/2013 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
59	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer ARCELORMITTAL INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED Vs SATISH KUMAR GUPTA & ORS. – [2018] 12 S.C.R. 3622018 INSC 935 Judge : R.F. NARIMAN,INDU MALHOTRA 10 SCC 345 : [2008] 10 SCR 697; Laurel Energetics Private Limited v. Securities and Exchange Board of India , (2017) 8 SCC 541 : [2017] 5 SCR 1005 – held inapplicable. 1.2 The expression “acting jointly” in the opening sentence of Section 29A cannot be confused with “joint taken. [Para 44-48] [438-A-E] M/s Subhkam Ventures (I) Private Limited v. The Securities and Exchange Board of India (Appeal No. 8 of 2009 decided on 15.1.2010) – relied on. 2.3 Section 29A(c) speaks of a corporate debtor “under the management or control of such person”. The expression Decision Date : 04-10-2018 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/9402/2018 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
60	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer M. SIDDIQ (D) THR. LRS. Vs MAHANT SURESH DAS AND OTHERS ETC. – [2018] 11 S.C.R. 1752019 INSC 1231 Judge : DIPAK MISRA,ASHOK BHUSHAN,S. ABDUL NAZEER Authority of India v. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (2014) 3 SCC 304; Securities and Exchange Board of India v. Sahara India Real Estate Corporation Limited and Others (2014) 8 SCC 751; Rajeev Dhavan v. Gulshan Kumar Mahajan and Others (2014) 12 SCC 618: [2014] 8 SCR 930; Vivek Narayan Sharma Decision Date : 27-09-2018 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/10866/2010 | Disposal Nature : Directions issued | Direction Issue : DIRECTIONS FOR FURTHER LISTING
61	English           हिन्दी – Hindi          मराठी – Marathi Disclaimer SOCIAL ACTION FORUM FOR MANAV ADHIKAR AND ANOTHER Vs UNION OF INDIA MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE AND OTHERS – [2018] 12 S.C.R. 192018 INSC 820 Judge : DIPAK MISRA,D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,A.M. KHANWILKAR Estate Corporation Limited v. Securities and Exchange Board of India : (2012) 10 SCC 603, Para 52; SCBA v. Union of India : (1998) 4 SCC 409, Para 47; Union of India v. Raghubir Singh (d) by Lrs. : (1989) 2 SCC 754, Para 7; Dayaram v. Sudhir Batham : (2012) 1 SCC 333 12 State of Punjab v. Decision Date : 14-09-2018 | Case No : WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)/73/2015 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
62	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer CHITRA SHARMA AND ORS. Vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. – [2018] 12 S.C.R. 10442018 INSC 681 Judge : DIPAK MISRA,D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,A.M. KHANWILKAR disqualified to act as a director under the Companies Act, 2013 (18 of 2013): A B C D E F G H 1071 Provided that this clause shall not apply in relation to a connected person referred to in clause (iii) of Explanation I; (f) is prohibited by the Securities and Exchange Board of India of Security Interest Act, 2002 (54 of 2002); (e) an Alternate Investment Fund registered with Securities and Exchange Board of India ; A B C D E F G H 1073 (f) such categories of persons as may be notified by the Central Government.” 31. Parliament has introduced Section 29 A into Decision Date : 09-08-2018 | Case No : WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)/744/2017 | Disposal Nature : Leave Granted & Disposed off
63	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer CHINTALAPATI SRINIVASA RAJU Vs SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA – [2018] 5 S.C.R. 7852018 INSC 510 Judge : R.F. NARIMAN,NAVIN SINHA CHINTALAPATI SRINIVASA RAJU v. Securities and Exchange Board of India (Civil Appeal No.16805 of 2017 Etc.) MAY 14, 2018 [R. F. NARIMAN AND NAVIN SINHA, JJ.] SEBI (Prohibition of Insider Trading) Regulations, 1992: Regn 2(e)(i), 2(c) – Insider Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992. Regn 2(e)(ii), 2(h)(ix) – Unpublished Price Sensitive Information (UPSI) – Satyam scam – Appellant Company-private company of the executive director/non-director of SCSL and his wife – Each holding 50% share capital of the company – Appellant sold Decision Date : 14-05-2018 | Case No : WRIT TO PETITION (CIVIL)…/16805/2017 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
64	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer SCM SOLIFERT LIMITED & ANR. Vs COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIA – [2018] 4 S.C.R. 3022018 INSC 354 Judge : ARUN MISHRA,NAVIN SINHA has been made in terms of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations, 2011, for the acquisition of shares, voting rights or control, such public announcement shall be deemed to be the “other document”.” 14. Schedule 1 to Decision Date : 17-04-2018 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/10678/2016 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
65	English           ગુજરાતી – Gujarati          हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. Vs UTILITY USERS’ WELFARE ASSOCIATION & ORS. – [2018] 9 S.C.R. 1062018 INSC 329 Judge : JASTI CHELAMESWAR,SANJAY KISHAN KAUL fixation is, of course, not adjudicatory. He submitted that Section 4 of The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act, 1997 was similar to Section 84(2) of the said Act, but there was no provision for a Judge to be appointed. Similar was stated to be the position of Section 4 of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Decision Date : 12-04-2018 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/14697/2015 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
66	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer INDIABULLS HOUSING FINANCE LIMITED Vs M/S. DECCAN CHRONICLE HOLDINGS LIMITED AND OTHERS – [2018] 1 S.C.R. 10962018 INSC 200 Judge : A.K. SIKRI,ASHOK BHUSHAN proceedings initiated under the said Act, it will be in order for a party to fall back upon the provisions of the other Acts mentioned in Section 37, namely, the Companies Act, 1956, the Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1956, the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992, the Recovery such law.” … .… .… .…. “37. Application of other laws not barred. – The provisions of this Act or the rules made thereunder shall be in addition to, and not in derogation of, the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956), the Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1956 (42 of 1956), the Securities and Exchange Board of India Decision Date : 23-02-2018 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/18/2018 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
67	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Vs RAKHI TRADING PRIVATE LTD. – [2018] 1 S.C.R. 9372018 INSC 119 Judge : KURIAN JOSEPH,R. BANUMATHI Securities and Exchange Board of India v. RAKHI TRADING PRIVATE LTD. (Civil Appeal No. 1969 of 2011) FEBRUARY 08, 2018 [KURIAN JOSEPH AND R. BANUMATHI, JJ.] SEBI (Prohibition of Fraudulent and Unfair Trade Practices relating to Securities Market) of the securities indicate that the respondent’s trades are not genuine and had only misleading appearance of trading in the securities market, without intending to transfer beneficial ownership. (Banumathi, J.) Securities and Exchange Board of India (Stock Brokers Decision Date : 08-02-2018 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/1969/2011 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
68	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer NIKESH TARACHAND SHAH Vs UNION OF INDIA & ANR. – [2017] 12 S.C.R. 3582017 INSC 1137 Judge : R.F. NARIMAN,SANJAY KISHAN KAUL Securities and Exchange Board of India Act 1992, Customs Act 1962, Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act 1976, Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act 1986, F Transplan,tation of Human Organs Act_ 1994, Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act 2000, Emigration Act were added. In Part B, several other offences were added C from the Indian Penal Code, as were offences under the Explosives Act 1884, Antiquities andArts Treasures Act 1972, Securities and Exchange Board of India Act 1992, Customs Act 1962, Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act 1976, Decision Date : 23-11-2017 | Case No : WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL)/67/2017 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
69	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer MANOHAR LAL SHARMA Vs CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ORS. – [2017] 10 S.C.R. 5622017 INSC 1022 Judge : ADARSH KUMAR GOEL,UDAY UMESH LALIT accounts/business – Petitioner C sought direction to the CBI to conduct an investigation/inquiry against the Indian offshore bank account holders, revealed in “Panama Papers” and further to register FIR and conduct investigation against Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) Chairman, conduct investigation against the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) Chairman, his associate directors, share brokers and companies . . 2. Averments in the petition are that “Panama Paper Leaks” report G (which refers to information relating to tax evasion by some individuals/ Decision Date : 09-10-2017 | Case No : WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL)/65/2016 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
70	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer DUSHYANT N. DALAL AND ANOTHER Vs SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA – [2017] 11 S.C.R. 4482017 INSC 1004 Judge : R.F. NARIMAN,SANJAY KISHAN KAUL B c D E F G H (2017] ll S.C.R. 448 DUSHYANT N. DALAL AND ANOTHER v. Securities and Exchange Board of India (Civil Appeal No. 5677 of2017) OCTOBER 04, 2017 [R. F. NARIMAN AND SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, JJ.J Interest: Whether i/1/erest can be recovered on orders uf s.220(2) of Income Tax Act only prospectively – Interest Act, 1978 – Securities and Exchange Board of India Act. 1992 – ss.28A and J 5JA -Income Tax Act, 1961 – s.220 – Equity. Interest – Levy of – Whether can have retrospective operation – Held: Interest belongs to the field uf Decision Date : 04-10-2017 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/5677/2017 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
71	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer M. D. FROZEN FOODS EXPORTS PVT. LTD. & ORS. Vs HERO FINCORP LTD. – [2017] 13 S.C.R. 8002017 INSC 976 Judge : R.F. NARIMAN,SANJAY KISHAN KAUL Companies Act, 1956, the Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act, C 1956, the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992, the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, or any other law for the time being in force.” 28. These observations, thus, leave no manner Act, 1956 ( 1 of 1956), the Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1956 ( 42 of 1956), the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 (15 of 1992), the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (51 of 1993) or any other law for the time being in G force.” Decision Date : 21-09-2017 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/15147/2017 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
72	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Vs SHRI KANAIYALAL BALDEVBHAI PATEL – [2017] 14 S.C.R. 2682017 INSC 963 Judge : RANJAN GOGOI,N.V. RAMANA 14 S.C.R. 268 A Securities and Exchange Board of India B v. SHRI KANAIYALAL BALDEVBHAI PATEL (Civil Appeal No. 2595 of2013) SEPTEMBER 20, 2017 [RANJAN GOGOi AND N. V. RAMANA, JJ.) Shares and Securities – Securities and Exchange Board of India (Prohibition of Fraudulent – ‘inducement’ and ‘fraud’ – Meaning of. G Disposing of the appeals, the Court HELD: Per N.V. Ramana, J.: Whether ‘front running by non-intermediary’ is a prohibited H practice under regulations 3 (a), (b), (c) and (d) and 4(1) of 268 Securities and Exchange Board of India v. SHRI Decision Date : 20-09-2017 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/2595/2013 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
73	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Vs CLASSIC CREDIT LTD. – [2017] 13 S.C.R. 5592017 INSC 778 Judge : J.S. KHEHAR,ARUN MISHRA 13 S.C.R. 559 Securities and Exchange Board of India A v. CLASSIC CREDIT LTD. (CriminalAppealNo. 67 of2011) AUGUST 21, 2017 [JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR, CJI AND ARUN MISHRA, J.] Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992: s.26(2) – Amendment causing change of forum of adjudicatory ‘forum’ was not altered at all by ‘the 2002 Amendment Act’. Section 26(2) of ‘the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992′, as it existed prior to the 2002 amendment, mandated that no Court inferior to that of a Metropolitan Magistrate (or, a Judicial Magistrate of the Decision Date : 21-08-2017 | Case No : CRIMINAL APPEAL/67/2011 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
74	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer RAJESH SHARMA & ORS. Vs STATE OF U.P. & ANR. – [2017] 9 S.C.R. 5292017 INSC 683 Judge : ADARSH KUMAR GOEL,UDAY UMESH LALIT Estate Corporation Limited v. Securities and Exchange Board of India (2012) 10 SCC 603 : (2012J 12 SCR 256; SCBA v. Union of India (1998) 4 SCC 409 : 11998) 2 SCR 795; Union of India v. Raghubir Singh (d) by Lrs. (1989) 2 SCC 754 : (1989) 3 SCR 316; Dayaram v. Sudhir Batham (2012) 1 SCC 333 : Decision Date : 27-07-2017 | Case No : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1265/2017 | Disposal Nature : Directions issued
75	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer LAUREL ENERGETICS PVT. LTD. Vs SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA – [2017] 5 S.C.R. 10052017 INSC 616 Judge : R.F. NARIMAN,SANJAY KISHAN KAUL 5 S.C.R. 1005 LAUREL ENERGETICS PVT. LTD. v. Securities and Exchange Board of India (Civil Appeal No. 5675 of 2017) JULY 13, 2017 (R; F. NARIMAN AND SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, JJ.( SEBI Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeover Regulations, 2011: Regn. 10 – Interpretation concerned, because the price paid for those acquisitions was H less than Rs.6.30 per share. LAUREL ENERGETICS PVT. LTD. v. Securities and Exchange Board of India [R. F. NARIMAN, J .] 5. On 2Q•h October, 2015 Laurel and Arbutus Consultancy LLP along with various other entities, who Decision Date : 13-07-2017 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/5675/2017 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
76	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer NATIONAL SECURITIES DEPOSITORY LTD. Vs SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA – [2017] 4 S.C.R. 9012017 INSC 206 Judge : PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE,R.F. NARIMAN 4 S.C.R. 901 NATIONAL SECURITIES DEPOSITORY LTD. v. Securities and Exchange Board of India (Civil Appeal No. 5173 of 2006) MARCH 7, 2017 [PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE AND R. F. NARIMAN, JJ.] Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 – ss. 11(1), A B 12, 151, l 5M, l 5T, Decision Date : 07-03-2017 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/5173/2006 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
77	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer SECURITIES & EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Vs BURREN ENERGY INDIA LTD. & ORS. – [2016] 8 S.C.R. 1012016 INSC 1089 Judge : RANJAN GOGOI,N.V. RAMANA 8 S.C.R. I 0 I SECURITIES & EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA v. BURREN ENERGY INDIA LTD. & ORS. (Civil Appeal No. 36 I of2007) DECEMBER 02, 2016 [RANJAN GOGOi AND N.V. RAMANA, JJ.] Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) company was the acquirer, UBL was the person acting in concert. This is evident from the letter of offer (public announcement) dated 15’h February, 2005. The embargo under Regulation 22(7) of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Decision Date : 02-12-2016 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/361/2007 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
78	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer PRAMOD JAIN AND OTHERS Vs SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA – [2016] 9 S.C.R. 1782016 INSC 1003 Judge : ANIL R. DAVE,ADARSH KUMAR GOEL B [2016] 9 S.C.R. 178 PRAMOD JAIN AND OTHERS v. Securities and Exchange Board of India (CivilAppealNo.9103 of2014) NOVEMBER 07, 2016 [ANIL R. DAVE AND ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, JJ.) Securities Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations, appellants are entitled to withdrawal of the public offer. The withdrawal has to H 178 PRAMOD JAIN AND OTHERS v. Securities and Exchange Board of India be dealt with under Regulation 27 of Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Decision Date : 07-11-2016 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/9103/2014 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
79	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Vs GAURAV VARSHNEY & ANR. – [2016] 7 S.C.R. 12016 INSC 535 Judge : J.S. KHEHAR,C. NAGAPPAN 7 S.C.R. I Securities and Exchange Board of India A v. GAURAV VARSHNEY & ANR. (Criminal Appeal Nos. 827-830 of2012) JULY 15,2016 (JAGDIGH SINGH KHEHAR AND C. NAGAPPAN, JJ.] Securities and Exchange Board Act, 1992: s.12(1 B) – Interpretation of – Held: Persons governed and therefore, cannot be construed as directory – The bar created for new operators, of a collective investment initiative, was, therefore, absolute and manda_tory. Securities and Exchange Board of India (Collective Investment Sche111es) Regulations, 1999: Regn. 5 – “existing Decision Date : 15-07-2016 | Case No : CRIMINAL APPEAL/827/2012 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
80	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Vs M/S. OPEE STOCK-LINK LTD. & ANR. – [2016] 4 S.C.R. 1712016 INSC 510 Judge : ANIL R. DAVE,R. BANUMATHI 4 S.C.R. 171 Securities and Exchange Board of India v. M/S. OPEE STOCK-LINK LTD. & ANR. (Civil Appeal No. 2252of2010) JULY 11, 2016 [ANIL R. DAVE AND R. BANUMATHI, JJ.) Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1956 – ss. 13, 2(i) – Securities and Exchange Board of India 1992 – s. 12A(a), (b), (c) – Securities and Exchange Board of India (Prohibition of Fraudulent and Unfair Trade Practices Relating to Securities Markets) Regulations, 2003 – Initial public offerings (!PO) – Shares offered to public at large by two companies – Shares over subscribed – Shares Decision Date : 11-07-2016 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/2252/2010 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
81	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer SUBRAMANIAN SWAMY Vs UNION OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF LAW & ORS. – [2016] 3 S.C.R. 8652016 INSC 427 Judge : DIPAK MISRA,PRAFULLA C. PANT Securities and Exchange Board of India and another 2012 (12) SCR 256 : (2012) 10 SCC 603; State of Karnataka and another v. Associated Management of English Medium Primary and Secondary Schools and others (2014) 9 SCC 485; Devidas Ramachandra Tuljapurkar v. State of Mahrashtra and others Decision Date : 13-05-2016 | Case No : WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)/184/2014 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
82	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer SIDDHARTH CHATURVEDI Vs SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA – [2016] 2 S.C.R. 4122016 INSC 260 Judge : KURIAN JOSEPH,R.F. NARIMAN B [2016] 2 S.C.R.412 SIDDHARTH CHATURVEDI v. Securities and Exchange Board of India (Civil Appeal No.14730 of2015 etc.) MARCH 14, 2016 [KURIAN JOSEPH AND ROHINTON FALi NARIMAN, JJ.] Securities and·Exehange Board of India Act, 1992 – ss. 15A (as amended in the year 2002) and SECURITI~S AND 413 EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA The following order of the Court was delivered A ORDER I. These appeals rai~e an interesting question of the interplay between section 15A, as amended in the year 2002, and Section I 5J of th<; Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 Decision Date : 14-03-2016 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/14730/2015 | Disposal Nature : Matter referred to larger bench
83	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Vs KISHORE R. AJMERA – [2016] 1 S.C.R. 11182016 INSC 201 Judge : RANJAN GOGOI,PRAFULLA C. PANT I S.C.R. 1118 A Securities and Exchange Board of India v. KISHORE R. AJMERA (Civil Appeal No.2818 OF 2008) B FEBRUARY 23, 2016 c [RANJAN GOGOi AND PRAFULLA C. PANT, JJ.) Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, I992 – s. 19 – Securities and Exchange Board of India Brokers and Sub­ Brokers) Regulations, 1992 – Reg 9 – Securities and Exchange Board of India (Prohibition of Fraudulent and Unfair Trade Practices Relating to the Securities Market) Regulations, 2003 – SEBI (Procedure for Holding Enquiry by Enquiry Officer and Imposing Penalty) Regulations, Decision Date : 23-02-2016 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/2818/2008 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
84	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer M/S MADRAS PETROCHEM LTD. & ANR Vs BIFR& ORS. – [2016] 11 S.C.R. 4192016 INSC 107 Judge : KURIAN JOSEPH,R.F. NARIMAN Securities and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 states that the said Act shall be in addition to and not in derogation of four Acts, namelyt the Companies Act, the Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1956, the Securities and Exchange Board of India The.provisions of this Act or the rules made thereunder shall be in addition to, and not in derogation of, the Companies Act, 1956 (I of 1956), the Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1956 ( 42 of 1956), the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 ( 15 of 1992), the Recovery of Debts Due to Decision Date : 29-01-2016 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/614/2016 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
85	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer GAUTAM KUNDU Vs MANOJ KUMAR ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, EASTERN REGION, DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT(PREVENTION OF MONEY LAUNDERING ACT) GOVT. OF INDIA – [2015] 15 S.C.R. 4992015 INSC 939 Judge : PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE,R.K. AGRAWAL – Prosecution u/s. 4 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) – Proceedings u/s. 24 of Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 (SEBI Act) pending – Bail application u/s. 439 Cr.P. C. – Rejected by High Court on the ground that there was no order holding D that no offence was Procedure, 1973 – s. 439- Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 – s. 4 – Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 2002 – s. 24. Dismissing the appeal, the Court HELD 1. The Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) deals with the offence of money laundering and the Parliament Decision Date : 16-12-2015 | Case No : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1706/2015 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
86	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer PREMIUM GLOBAL SECURITIES PVT. LTD. & ORS. Vs SECURITIES & EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA & ANR. – [2015] 14 S.C.R. 2012015 INSC 904 Judge : VIKRAMAJIT SEN,SHIVA KIRTI SINGH roof- Thus, any action taken by the appellants to E comply with restriction of not participating in both the activities simultaneously would be under compulsion of law – Appellants entitled to fee continuity benefits – Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992- s. 11 (2). F Disposing Decision Date : 09-12-2015 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/3682/2006 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
87	English           ગુજરાતી – Gujarati          हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer OPG SECURITIES PRIVATE LTD. Vs S.E.B.I. & ANR. – [2015] 14 S.C.R. 1712015 INSC 888 Judge : VIKRAMAJIT SEN,SHIVA KIRTI SINGH 14 S.C.R. 171 OPG SECURITIES PRIVATE LTD. v. S.E.B.I. & ANR. (Civil Appeal No. 3548 of 2010) DECEMBER 04, 2015 [VIKRAMAJlT SEN AND SHIVA KIRTI SINGH, JJ.] A B · Securities and Exchange Board of India (Stock-brokers and Sub-brokers) Regulations, 1992: Dispute arose on Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 (for brevity ‘the Act’) against the judgment and order dated 11th February, 2010 passed by the G Securities Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai (for brevity ‘the SAT) in Appeal No. 28 of 2009. The dispute between the parties has arisen on account Decision Date : 04-12-2015 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/3548/2010 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
88	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer SECURITIES & EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Vs MAGNUM EQUITY SERVICES LTD. & ORS. – [2015] 12 S.C.R. 1022015 INSC 871 Judge : VIKRAMAJIT SEN,SHIVA KIRTI SINGH 12 S.C.R. 102 A SECURITIES & EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA B v. MAGNUM EQUITY SERVICES LTD. & ORS. NOVEMBER 30, 2015 (Civil Appeal No. 4719 of 2008) [VIKRAMAJIT SEN AND SHIVA KIRTI SINGH, JJ.) Securities and Exchange Board of India (Stock Brokers C and S/Jb-brokers) [2015] 12S.C.R. A NSE transferred the membership card of the Firm to Magnum on 25.4.1996. Thus Magnum became a member of NSE with effect from 25.4.1996. Subsequently, the Company applied to the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) for registration as a stock broker, which request Decision Date : 30-11-2015 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/4719/2008 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
89	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer SEBI THROUGH ITS CHAIHMAN Vs ROOFIT INDUSTRIES LTD. – [2015] 12 S.C.R. 1902015 INSC 864 Judge : VIKRAMAJIT SEN,SHIVA KIRTI SINGH B [2015] 12 S.C.R. 190 SEBI THROUGH ITS CHAIHMAN . v. ROOFITINDUSTRIES LTD. (Civil Appeal Nos.1364-1365 of 2005) NOVEMBER 26, 2015 [VIKRAMAJIT SEN AND SHIVA KIRTI SINGH, JJ.] Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 – s. c 15A – Allegations of share-price rigging passed by the tribunal set aside. Allowing the appeals, the Court G HELD: The amendment to Section 15A of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 did not indicate that the amended Section would apply to … penalties imposed after 29.10.2002. The amendment was merely made Decision Date : 26-11-2015 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/1364/2005 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
90	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer A. R. DAHIYA Vs SEBI – [2015] 12 S.C.R. 2022015 INSC 865 Judge : VIKRAMAJIT SEN,SHIVA KIRTI SINGH B [2015] 12 S.C.R. 202 A. R. DAHIYA v. SEBI (Civil Appeal No. 2127 of 2006) NOVEMBER 26, 2015 [VIKRAMAJIT SEN AND SHIVA KIRTI SINGH, JJ.] Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial c Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations, 1997 – Regs 3, 10, 11, 12, 16 announcement and offer to the shareholders of the. target company the price of Rs. 23. 75 per share upheld – Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations, 2011. D Dismissing the appeal, the Court HELD: 1.1 It is evident from a reading Decision Date : 26-11-2015 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/2727/2006 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
91	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer S.E.B.I. Vs ALLIANCE FINSTOCK LTD. & ORS. ETC. ETC. – [2015] 10 S.C.R. 1452015 INSC 823 Judge : VIKRAMAJIT SEN,SHIVA KIRTI SINGH paid on or before the 1 •1 day of October each year payable by draft in favour of ”The Securities and Exchange Board of India ” at Bombay, or at the respective regional office”. 5. Case of the SEBI is that since Para 4 of Schedule Ill was introduced by an amending notification dated Decision Date : 03-11-2015 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/4493/2006 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
92	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer SECURITIES & EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Vs M/S. PREBON YAMANE (I) LTD. – [2015] 10 S.C.R. 2502015 INSC 822 Judge : VIKRAMAJIT SEN,SHIVA KIRTI SINGH for brevity) to continue to grant the Respondent the “fee continuity benefit” B as was available to them before the NSE decided to permit segmental surrender of membership to its members. In response to the fee demanded by the Appellant, namely the Securities and Exchange Board of India hasten to add that shortly subsequent to these events, the Appellant by its letter dated 4.4.1999 to the Respondent had granted registration to it “as a stock broker”. D The Appellant made its permission conditional inter alia, upon payment of fees for registration provided in the Securities and Exchange Board of India Decision Date : 03-11-2015 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/7607/2005 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
93	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer STATE OF TAMIL NADU &ANR. Vs TVL. SOUTH INDIAN SUGAR MILLS ASSN. & ORS. – [2015] 9 S.C.R. 1482015 INSC 567 Judge : VIKRAMAJIT SEN,SHIVA KIRTI SINGH 9 S.C.R. A B.S.E. Brokers’ Forum, Bombay and Ors. v. Securities and Exchange Board of India and Ors. (2001) 3 SCC 482 – referred to. Shri Bileshwar Khand Udyog Khedut Sahakari Mandali B Ltd. v. State of Gujarat (1992) 2 SCC 42: 1992 (1) SCR 391; Gujchem Distillers India Ltd. v. State has been clarified and crystallized by this Court. We shall H 158 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2015] 9 S.C.R. A reproduce these paragraphs from B.S.E. Brokers’ Forum, Bombay and Others v. Securities and Exchange Board of India and others, (2001) 3 sec 482 to enable their fruitful Decision Date : 12-08-2015 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/1028/2005 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
94	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Vs PANASIA ADVISORS LTD. & ANR. – [2015] 11 S.C.R. 902015 INSC 483 Judge : F.M. IBRAHIM KALIFULLA,SHIVA KIRTI SINGH 11S.C.R.90 A Securities and Exchange Board of India B v. PANASIAADVISORS LTD. &ANR. (Civil Appeal No.10560 of 2013) JULY06,2015 [FAKKIR MOHAMED IBRAHIM KALIFULLA AND SHIVA KIRTI SINGH, JJ.] c Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992: ss.2(2), 11(1), 11(2), question that arises in this appeal relates to B the jurisdiction of SEBI under the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992, (in short “SEBIAct, 1992”) to initiate proceedings against the respondents as Lead Managers to the Global Depository Receipts (in short “GDRs”) issued outside Decision Date : 06-07-2015 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/10560/2013 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
95	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer SECURITIESAND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA(SEBI) & ANR. Vs SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN. LTD. & ORS. – [2015] 7 S.C.R. 10252015 INSC 1001 Judge : T.S. THAKUR,ANIL R. DAVE,A.K. SIKRI in Civil Appeal No. 8643 of 2012. These contempt petitions filed by the Securities and Exchange Board of India (for short, ‘SEBI’) have the origin in the judgments that were pronounced in the civil G appeals, numbers whereof are mentioned above. It so happened that Sahara India Real Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) at the request made G by Amby Valley (Mauritius) Ltd. on behalf of Sahara India Real Estate Corporation Ltd. and Sahara Housing Investment Corporation Ltd., in compliance with the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India dated 261h March 2014. .. Decision Date : 19-06-2015 | Case No : CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL)/260/2013 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
96	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer VIDEOCON INTERNATIONAL LTD. Vs SECURITIES & EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA – [2015] 3 S.C.R. 12015 INSC 27 Judge : J.S. KHEHAR,M.Y. EQBAL 3 S.C.R. 1 VIDEOCON INTERNATIONAL LTD. v. SECURITIES & EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA (Civil Appeal No. 117 of 2005) JANUARY 13, 2015 [JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR AND M.Y. EQBAL, JJ.] A B Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 – c s.15Z (as amended by the Securities and Exchange Board of India may be a limited right. A Under the unamended Section 15Z of Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 the appellate remedy to the High Court, against an order passed by the · Securities Appellate Tribunal, was circumscribed by the words ” … on any question of fact or law arisigg Decision Date : 13-01-2015 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/117/2005 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
97	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer M/S. DISCOVERY WEALTH MANAGEMENT SERVICES PVT. LTD. & ORS. Vs MIS. PADMINI ENGINEERING PVT. LTD. & ORS. – [2014] 14 S.C.R. 2652014 INSC 1039 Judge : DIPAK MISRA,UDAY UMESH LALIT Securities and Exchange Board of India (Listing C of Securities) Guidelines, 2003: clauses 8.1 to 8.5, 12.1 – Delisting of shares- BSE did not al/ow the delisting of shares of Hefla· Ltd. as level of public shareholding in Hella India did not go below 10% – Held: The offer of delisting would fail holds 51% of its share capital. In July, 2005, Hella India decided to have its shares delisted from both the Stock Exchanges in accordance with the provisions contained in the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Delisting of Securities) Guidelines, 2003 (for short E “the guidelines”). Decision Date : 10-12-2014 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/5027/2008 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
98	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer P.S. MEHERHOMJI Vs K.T. VIJAY KUMAR & ORS. – [2014] 11 S.C.R. 512014 INSC 710 Judge : M.Y. EQBAL,PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE Capital Limited, 2) The Secretary, Indian Banks Association, Mumbai, 3) The Chairman, Securities and Exchange Board · of India , 5) Finance Minister, Government of India, New Delhi, 6) State Minister of Finance (Banking), Govt. of India, New Delhi, 7) Secretary, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi, Decision Date : 14-10-2014 | Case No : CRIMINAL APPEAL/2211/2014 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
99	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer THE STOCK EXCHANGE, BOMBAY Vs V. S. KANDALGAONKAR & ORS. – [2014] 14 S.C.R. 4092014 INSC 678 Judge : RAJENDRA MAL LODHA,KURIAN JOSEPH,R.F. NARIMAN exchanges, as the case may be. 9. Power of recognised stock exchanges to make bye­ laws.- (1)Any recognised stock exchange may, subjectto the previous approval of the Securities and Exchange Board of India , make bye-laws for the regulation and control of contracts. (2) In particular, and securities, the passing on of delivery orders and the regulation and maintenance of such clearing house; (c) the submission to the Securities and Exchange Board of India by the clearing house as soon as may be after each periodical settlement of all or any of the following particulars as Decision Date : 25-09-2014 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/4354/2003 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
100	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer MADRAS BAR ASSOCIATION Vs UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER – [2014] 10 S.C.R. 12014 INSC 685 Judge : RAJENDRA MAL LODHA,J.S. KHEHAR,JASTI CHELAMESWAR,A.K. SIKRI,R.F. NARIMAN from preferring the appeal in time. (iv) The Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, .,1992 Section 15Z. Appeal to Supreme Court. – Any person aggrieved by any decision or order of the Securities Appellate Tribunal may file an appeal to the Supreme Court within sixty days from the Decision Date : 25-09-2014 | Case No : TRANSFERRED CASE (CIVIL)/150/2006 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
101	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer 1.P. HOLDING ASIA SINGAPORE P. LTD. & ANR. Vs SECURITIES & EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA – [2014] 8 S.C.R. 3992014 INSC 993 Judge : MADAN B. LOKUR,KURIAN JOSEPH SECURITIES 405 & EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDll\ the Securities Appellate Tribunal are set aside. [Para 46] A [423-B-C] Swedish Match AB v. Securities and Exchange Board of India 2004 (3) Suppl. SCR 745 : (2004) 11 sec 641 – referred to. Case Law Reference : (2001) s sec 133 Referred to 2004 share B at Rs. 544.20 (Rs.523/- + Rs.21.20). We were told that the public announcement received an overwhelming response. 8. On completing these formalities, the merchant banker of the appellants filed a draft letter of offer dated 15th April, C 2011 with the Securities and Exchange Board of India Decision Date : 20-08-2014 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/7390/2012 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
102	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer UNION OF INDIA THROUGH CBI Vs NIRALA YADAV @ RAJA RAM YADAV @ DEEPAK YADAV – [2014] 6 S.C.R. 1482014 INSC 425 Judge : DIPAK MISRA,N.V. RAMANA Dinesh Dalmia (supra), which has been placed reliance upon by Mr. Dey, the CBI lodged the First Information Report against the appellant and three companies on a H 176 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2014] 6 S.C.R. A complaint made by the Securities and Exchange Board of India . As the appellant Decision Date : 30-06-2014 | Case No : CRIMINAL APPEAL/786/2010 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
103	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer SUBRATA CHATTORAJ Vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS. – [2014] 6 S.C.R. 7832014 INSC 392 Judge : T.S. THAKUR,C. NAGAPPAN F into accounts. The daily cash collected less expenses was deposited at branch account and the money pooled and transferred to other accounts as per CMD’s instructions and utilized to issue the cheques. The Report also points out G violation of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Decision Date : 09-05-2014 | Case No : WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)/401/2013 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
104	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer SUBRATA ROY SAHARA Vs UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS – [2014] 12 S.C.R. 5732014 INSC 367 Judge : K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN,J.S. KHEHAR Bench started adopting sequentially harsher means to persuade compliance of this Court’s orders, leading finally to the passing of the impugned order – Principles of natural justice were followed – There was no bias – Constitution of India, 1950- Arts. 32 rlw 21, 129 and 142- C Securities and Exchange Board of India complaint was addressed by ~Professional Group 8 for Investors Protection” on 25.12.2009, alleging violation of the provisions of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 (hereinafter referred to as, ‘the SEBI Act’), against the companies under reference. On similar lines, Decision Date : 06-05-2014 | Case No : WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL)/57/2014 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
105	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Vs M/S. AKSHYA INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD. – [2014] 13 S.C.R. 4022014 INSC 340 Judge : S.S. NIJJAR,A.K. SIKRI 13 S.C.R. 402 A Securities and Exchange Board of India V. M/S. AKSHYA INFRASTRUCTURE PVT.LTD. B (Civil Appeal No. 6041of2013) APRIL 25, 2014 [SURINDER SINGH NIJJAR AND A. K. SIKRI, JJ.] c SEBI (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations, 1997-Regn. 27 and Regulation 27(1 )(a) was deleted. [Para 36][424-G-H; 425-A-B] c D E Nirma Industries Ltd. & Anr. v. Securities and Exchange Board of India (2013) 8 SCC 20 : 2013 (3) SCR 662 – affirmed. Clariant International Ltd. & Anr. v. Securities & Exchange Board of India (2004) 8 SCC 524 : Decision Date : 25-04-2014 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/6041/2013 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
106	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer MATHEW VARGHESE Vs M. AMRITHA KUMAR & ORS. – [2014] 2 S.C.R. 736 Judge : A.K. PATNAIK,F.M. IBRAHIM KALIFULLA provisions of the other Acts mentioned in s.37 namely, the Companies Act, 1956, the Securities Contract& (Regulation) Act, 1956, the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992, the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Finances Institutions Act, 1993, or any other law for the time being in other Acts mentioned in Section 37, E namely, the Companies Act, 1956, the Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1956, the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992, the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Finances Institutions Act, 1993, or any other law for the time being in Decision Date : 10-02-2014 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/1927/2014 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
107	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer ARUN KUMAR AGRAWAL Vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS. – [2014] 3 S.C.R. 8612013 INSC 744 Judge : S.S. NIJJAR,PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE (5) of s.4 C of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 (SEBI Act), as well as the qualification contained in Government communication, which required that the Chairman should be a person of high integrity; (b) that appointment of respondent No.4 was the result of importance to the well being of the economic health of the nation. [para 29) [897-B, F- E H; 898-A] Sahara India Real Estate Corporation Ltd. & Ors. Vs. Securities and Exchange Board of India & Anr. 2012 (12) SCR 1 = 2013 (1) SCC 1 • referred to. 1.2 The functions performed by SEBI are such Decision Date : 01-11-2013 | Case No : WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)/374/2012 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
108	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer BHAGWATI DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. Vs PEERLESS GENERAL FINANCE & INVESTMENT COMPANY LTD AND ANR. – [2013] 7 S.C.R. 5472013 INSC 463 Judge : C.K. PRASAD,V. GOPALA GOWDA State or States or area, shall- (i) be subject to such terms and conditions as may be stipulated by the respective stock exchanges with B prior approval of Securities and Exchange Board of India ; (ii) require prior permission from the respective stock exchanges if so stipulated by the Decision Date : 15-07-2013 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/7445/2004 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
109	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer NIRMA INDUSTRIES LTD. & ANR. Vs SECURITIES & EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA – [2013] 3 S.C.R. 6622013 INSC 332 Judge : S.S. NIJJAR,ANIL R. DAVE on merits, there was no delay on the part of SEBI in approving the draft letter of E offer – Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 – s. 15Z – Delay/Laches. The appellants filed the instant appeal challenging order of the Security Appellate Tribunal (SAT) whereby the appeal Securities and Exchange Board of India & Anr. (2012) 8 SCALE 101 – held inapplicable. B 2.4. In the instant case, no fraud has been played on the appellants as such. The shares were acquired by the appellants on the basis of an informed business decision. The conclusion reached by SAT that Decision Date : 09-05-2013 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/6082/2008 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
110	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer N. NARAYANAN Vs ADJUDICATING OFFICER, SEBI – [2013] 6 S.C.R. 3912013 INSC 287 Judge : K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN,DIPAK MISRA 6 S.C.R. 391 N. NARAYANAN v. ADJUDICATING OFFICER, SEBI (Civil Appeal Nos. 4112-4113 of 2013) APRIL 26, 2013 [K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN AND DIPAK MISRA, JJ.] Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 – s.12A A B & s. 15HA rlw s. 15J – Securities and Exchange Board of India and revenues in the financial statements and lured the general public to invest in the shares of the company based on such false financial statements and thereby violated the D provisions of Securities and Exchange Board of India (Prohibition of Fraudulent and Unfair Trade Practice Relating Decision Date : 26-04-2013 | Case No : MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION/4112/2013 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
111	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer M/S. P.G.F. LIMITED & ORS. Vs UNION OF INDIA & ANOTHER – [2013] 6 S.C.R. 322013 INSC 155 Judge : B.S. CHAUHAN,F.M. IBRAHIM KALIFULLA B c [2013] 6 S.C.R. 32 M/S. P.G.F. LIMITED & ORS. v. UNION OF INDIA & ANOTHER (Civil Appeal No.6572 of 2004) MARCH 12, 2013 [DR. B.S. CHAUHAN AND FAKKIR MOHAMED IBRAHIM KALIFULLA, JJ.] Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992. ss. 11 AA – Constitutional validity same shoul,d be disposed of as expeditiously as possible and on a time bound basis, so E that the legal position is settled one way or the other. [Paras 31 and 32] [65-H; 66-A-G] 2.1. The paramount object of the Parliament in enacting the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act F Decision Date : 12-03-2013 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/6572/2004 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
112	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Vs M/S. INFORMETICS VALUATION AND RATING PVT. LTD. – [2013] 3 S.C.R. 4262013 INSC 111 Judge : S.S. NIJJAR,M.Y. EQBAL B [2013] 3 S.C.R. 426 Securities and Exchange Board of India v. M/S. INFORMETICS VALUATION AND RATING PVT. LTD. (Civil Appeal No. 291 of 2012) FEBRUARY 19, 2013 [SURINDER SINGH NIJJAR AND M.Y. EQBAL, JJ.] Securities and Exchange Board of India (Credit Rating Regulations, 1999 – Regulations 3, 4(e), 6, 7 and C First Schedule Form A – Application under Regulation 3 by company, to Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) seeking registration as a Credit Rating Agency (CRA) – SEBI required the company to furnish complete details of its promoters, Decision Date : 19-02-2013 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/291/2012 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
113	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer THE GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND OTHERS Vs CH. GANDHI – [2013] 2 S.C.R. 202013 INSC 110 Judge : K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN,DIPAK MISRA Sharma v. Union of India and Others 1988 SCR 1034 = 1988 Suppl. SCC 30; Ritesh Agarwal and Another v. Securities and Exchange Board of India and Others 2008 (8) SCR 553 = 2008 (8) SCC 205; Roshan Lal Tandon v. Union of India and Another 1968 SCR 185 = 1967 AIR 1889; Raj Kumar v. Union of India – relied on. Bhagat Ram Sharma v. Union of India and Others 1988 SCR 1034 = 1988 Suppl. SCC 30; Ritesh Agarwal and Another v. Securities and Exchange Board of India and Others 2008 (8) SCR 553 = 2008 (8) SCC 205; Roshan Lal Tandon v. Union of India and Another 1968 SCR 185 = 1967 AIR 1889; Raj Decision Date : 19-02-2013 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/1427/2013 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
114	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LTD. Vs HINDUSTAN NATIONAL GLASS & IND. LTD. AND ORS. – [2012] 13 S.C.R. 6972012 INSC 580 Judge : A.K. PATNAIK,SWATANTER KUMAR Joseph KuruvillaVel/ukunnel v. Reserve Bank of India 1962 Supp (3) SCR 632; Common Cause (A Registered Society) v. Union of India and Anr. (2010) 11 SCC 528: 2010 (10) SCR 124; G Securities and Exchange Board of India v. Ajay Agarwal (2010) 3 SCC 765: 2010 (3) SCR 70; Executive in C Securities and Exchange Board of India v. Ajay Agarwal [(2010) 3 SCC 765] in which the purpose of the Act was taken into consideration while interpreting the provisions of the Act. He also relied on Executive Engineer, Southern Electricity Supply Company of Orissa Ltd. (SouthCo) and Decision Date : 11-12-2012 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/8916/2012 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
115	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORP. LTD. & ORS. Vs SECURITIES & EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA & ANR. – [2012] 12 S.C.R. 2562012 INSC 388 Judge : S.H. KAPADIA,D.K. JAIN,S.S. NIJJAR,J.S. KHEHAR,RANJANA PRAKASH DESAI cause notice to the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI), respondent No. 1 herein, directing Sahara to put on affidavit as to how they intend to secure the liabilities incurred c by them to the OFCD holders during the pendency of the Civil o Appeals. 4. Pursuant to the Decision Date : 11-09-2012 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/9813/2011 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
116	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPORATION LIMITED & ORS. Vs SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA & ANR. – [2012] 12 S.C.R. 12012 INSC 367 Judge : K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN,J.S. KHEHAR 12 S.C.R. 1 SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPORATION LIMITED A & ORS. v. Securities and Exchange Board of India & ANR. (Civil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011) AUGUST 31, 2012 [K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN AND JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR, JJ.] B Companies Act, 1956 – s. 55A – Allegation of pre- planned attempt to bypass the regulatory (and administrative) authority of SEBI – Invitation to subscribe to Optionally Fully Convertible Debentures (OFCDs) – Inquiries made by the Investigating Authority – Powers of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (‘SEBI? u/s.55A(b) of the Companies Decision Date : 31-08-2012 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/9813/2011 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
117	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer CANTONMENT BOARD, JAMMU & ORS. Vs JAGAT PAL SINGH CHEEMA – [2012] 6 S.C.R. 11922012 INSC 328 Judge : P. SATHASIVAM,RANJAN GOGOI 1991 (3) A SCR 633 = 1991 (4) SCC 243; Municipal Corporation of the City of Ahmedabad v. Ben Hiraben Manila/ 1983 (2) SCC 442; N. Mani v. Sangeetha Theatre 2004 (12) SCC 278; and B.S.E. Broker’s Forum, Bombay v, Securities and Exchange Board of India 2001 (3) sec 482 – relied on. B Case Decision Date : 09-08-2012 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/5820/2012 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
118	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer DELHI RACE CLUB LTD. Vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. – [2012] 8 S.C.R. 12012 INSC 282 Judge : D.K. JAIN,ANIL R. DAVE 670: 1996 (4) Suppl. SCR 92; State of Tripura G v. Sudhir Ranjan Nath (1997) 3 SCC 665: 1997 (2) SCR 29; B.S.E. Brokers’ Forum, Bombay & Ors. v. Securities and Exchange Board of India & Ors. (2001) 3 SCC 482 – referred to. Shannon v. Lower Mainland Dairy Products Board AIR H 1939 PC Bombay & Ors. Vs. Securities and Exchange Board of India & Ors. 9 and Liberty Cinema case (supra) learned counsel argued that even though quid pro quo may not be required if the fee is classified as regulatory fee, nevertheless there must be a broad co-relation between the fee B levied and Decision Date : 13-07-2012 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/6461/2003 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
119	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer SESA INDUSTRIES LTD. Vs KRISHNA H. BAJAJ AND ORS. – [2011] 3 S.C.R. 3172011 INSC 103 Judge : D.K. JAIN,H.L. DATTU G. Poddar (1996) 22 CLA 200 (Born); Securities and Exchange Board of India Vs. Sterlite Industries H – 326 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2011) 3 S.C.R. A (India) Ltd. (2003) 113 Comp Cas 273; Modus Analysis and Information P. Ltd. & Ors. In re (2008) 142 Comp Cas 410 (Cal); Larsen and without any independent verification. Relying on the decisions in Securities and Exchange Board of India Vs. Sterlite Industries (India) Ltd.16; Modus Analysis and Information P. Ltd. & Ors, In re17; Miheer H. Mafatlal (supra); Larsen and F Toubro Limited, In re16; Wood Polymer (supra) and Decision Date : 07-02-2011 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/1430/2011 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
120	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer M/S. TECHNO SHARES & STOCKS LTD. Vs THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX IV – [2010] 11 S.C.R. 4372010 INSC 596 Judge : S.H. KAPADIA,K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN to be due to the Securities and Exchange Board of India , to the Exchange or to the Clearing House by the defaulter; (iii) Third – the rectification or replacement of or H 450 A B c D E F G H SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2010] 11 S.C.R. compensation for any bad deliveries Decision Date : 09-09-2010 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/7780/2010 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
121	English           हिन्दी – Hindi          தமிழ் – Tamil Disclaimer JAMES JOSEPH Vs STATE OF KERALA – [2010] 10 S.C.R. 8442010 INSC 564 Judge : R.V. RAVEENDRAN,H.L. GOKHALE 1908 (5 of 1908) relating to appeals to the High Court shall, as far as may be, apply 8 in the case of appeals under this section. Section 15Z of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 15Z. Appeal to Supreme Court.- Any person aggrieved by any decision or order of Decision Date : 31-08-2010 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/7207/2010 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
122	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer VENTURE GLOBAL ENGINEERING Vs SATYAM COMPUTER SERVICES LTD. AND ANOTHER. – [2010] 9 S.C.R. 8582010 INSC 501 Judge : P. SATHASIVAM,A.K. GANGULY accounts of respondent no. 1 were exaggerated and c overstated. Along with the application for additional pleading, relevant paragraphs of Raju’s statements have been enclosed. (b) On 7.1.2009, it was reported that the Securities and Exchange Board of India D (SEBI) directed an investigation Decision Date : 11-08-2010 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/6519/2010 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
123	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer DAIICHI SANKYO COMPANY LTD. Vs JAYARAM CHIGURUPATI & ORS. – [2010] 8 S.C.R. 2512010 INSC 374 Judge : S.H. KAPADIA,AFTAB ALAM,SWATANTER KUMAR 8 S.C.R. 251 DAIICHI SANKYO COMPANY LTD. v. JAYARAM CHIGURUPATI & ORS. (Civil Appeal No. 7148 of 2009) JULY 08, 2010 [S.H. KAPADIA, CJI, AFTAB ALAM AND SWATANTER KUMAR, JJ.] Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial A B Acquisition of Shares and not a ‘person acting in concert’ with Daiichi was of no consequence and price paid by Ranbaxy for Zenotech shares at that time would not attract clause (b) of Regulation 20(4) – Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992. 8 Regulation 2(e)(1} – Concept “person acting in concert” – Decision Date : 08-07-2010 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/7148/2009 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
124	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Vs AJAY AGARWAL – [2010] 3 S.C.R. 702010 INSC 123 Judge : G.S. SINGHVI,A.K. GANGULY B [2010] 3 S.C.R. 70 Securities and Exchange Board of India v. AJAY AGARWAL (Civil Appeal No. 1697 of 2005) FEBRUARY 25, 2010· [G.S. SINGHVI AND ASOK KUMAR GANGULY, JJ.] Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 – Enactment of – Purpose – Held: The Act was enacted to achieve the twin purposes of promoting orderly and healthy growth of securities market and for protecting the interest of investors – The Act is pre-eminently a social welfare legislation. D Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992: E s. 11 – Amendment of – Done on several Decision Date : 25-02-2010 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/1697/2005 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
125	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer MAHESH RATILAL SHAH Vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. – [2010] 1 S.C.R. 7842010 INSC 49 Judge : ALTAMAS KABIR,CYRIAC JOSEPH “BSE”), the petitioner herein F filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution against the Union of India, the Securities and Exchange Board of India (hereinafter referred to as the “SEBI”) and the BSE, inter alia, for a direction upon the Union submitted that the E SEBI as a statutory body established under Section 3 of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 (hereinafter referred to as the “SEBI Act”), was empowered under Section 11 of the Act to protect the interests of the investors in securities and to promote Decision Date : 19-01-2010 | Case No : SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL)/21686/2006 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
126	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer C.J. PAUL AND ORS. Vs DISTRICT COLLECTOR AND ORS. – [2009] 12 S.C.R. 2332009 INSC 980 Judge : S.B. SINHA,DEEPAK VERMA not from the date of knowledge. [Para 16] [242-8-D] E 1.5. It is now well-settled that the Court cannot supply casus omissus. [Para 18] [242-G-H] Ritesh Agarwal and Another v. Securities and Exchange Board of India (2008) 8 SCC 205 and Southern F Petrochemical Industries Co. Ltd. Decision Date : 31-07-2009 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/4968/2009 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
127	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer GLOBAL ENERGY LTD. & ANR. Vs CENTRAL ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION – [2009] 9 S.C.R. 222009 INSC 785 Judge : S.B. SINHA,CYRIAC JOSEPH ancillary and procedural powers can be delegated and not the essential legislative point. 29. Our attention has been drawn to some other legislations wherein the concept of ‘fit and proper person’ had G been applied, namely, Securities and Exchange Board of India (Criteria for Fit and Decision Date : 11-05-2009 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/3457/2009 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
128	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer S.E.B.I Vs SAIKALA ASSOCIATES LTD. – [2009] 6 S.C.R. 7982009 INSC 576 Judge : ARIJIT PASAYAT,LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA 6 S.C.R. 798 A S.E.B.I v. SAIKALA ASSOCIATES LTD. (Civil Appeal No. 3696 of 2005) B APRIL 21, 2009. [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT AND LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA, JJ.] Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 – ss. c 12(1) and 15T(4) – Power of Securities Appellate Tribunal suspension .. or cancellation of cerlificate of registrat’on – Tribunal being a statutory body could not have travelled beyond the scope of the statute taking shelter under a discretionary power – Securities and Exchange Board of India , (Stock Brokers and E Sub Brokers) Rules,· 1992 – Decision Date : 21-04-2009 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/3696/2005 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
129	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer PTC INDIA LTD. Vs CENTRAL ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION THR. ITS SECRETARY – [2009] 4 S.C.R. 1342009 INSC 329 Judge : ARIJIT PASAYAT,H.S. BEDI,A.K. GANGULY E Regulatory Commission (Fixation of Trading Margin) Regulations, 2006. West Bengal Electricity Regulatory Commission v. CESC Ltd. 2002 (8) SCC 715; Clariant International Ltd. and Anr. v. F Securities and Exchange Board of India 2004 (8) SCC 524; Cellular Operators Association of India Decision Date : 06-03-2009 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/3902/2006 | Disposal Nature : Matter referred to larger bench
130	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA Vs STATE OF KERALA AND ORS. – [2009] 3 S.C.R. 7352009 INSC 286 Judge : B.N. AGRAWAL,G.S. SINGHVI addition to, and not in derogation of, the Companies Act, 1956, the Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1956, the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992, the Recovery of Debts ,. Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 or any other law for the time being in force. F rules made thereunder shall be in addition “‘ to, and not in derogation of, the Companies Act, 1956 (1 F of 1956), the Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1956 (42of1956), the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 (15 of 1992), the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Decision Date : 27-02-2009 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/95/2005 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
131	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer UNION OF INDIA & ANR. Vs SHREEJI COLOUR CHEM INDUSTRIES – [2008] 13 S.C.R. 5022008 INSC 1041 Judge : ARIJIT PASAYAT,MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA demand was mad~. [Paras 9,10) [507-C & DJ Modi Industries Ltd., Modinagar & Ors. v. Commissioner B of Income Tax, De/bi & Ors. [1995 (6) SCC 396) and Clariant International Ltd. v. Securities and Exchange Board of India , 2004 (8) sec 524 – relied on. Sandvik Asia Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Decision Date : 15-09-2008 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/5643/2008 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
132	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer NIKHIL KANCHANALA LVAKHARIA Vs SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA AND ANOTHER – [2008] 8 S.C.R. 9462008 INSC 684 Judge : TARUN CHATTERJEE,DALVEER BHANDARI 8 S.C.R. 946 A NIKHIL KANCHANALA LVAKHARIA -1 – v.. Securities and Exchange Board of India AND ANOTHER (Civil Appeal No. 4210 Of 2006) B MAY 15, 2008 [TARUN CHATTERJEE AND DALVEER BHANDARl,JJ] ~ SEBI (STOCK BROKERS AND .SUB-BROKERS) c REGULATIONS, 1992: Regulation Exchange and was carrying on the business of stock-broker in the name of a stock broking firm; that his father, because of his ill health, nominated F him in his place as a member of the Stock Exchange, and thus, he became a partner of the firm; that the Securities and Exchange Board of India Decision Date : 15-05-2008 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/4210/2006 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
133	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer RITESH AGARWAL AND ANR. Vs SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA ACT AND ORS. – [2008] 8 S.C.R. 5532008 INSC 657 Judge : S.B. SINHA,LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA ~ – * • [2008] 8 S.C.R. 553 RITESH AGARWAL AND ANR. V. Securities and Exchange Board of India AND ORS. (Civil Appeal No. 4681 Of 2006) MAY 13, 2008 [S.B. SINHA AND LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA, JJ] SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF /NOIA A B ACT, 1992: C ss. 11 and within the purview of the term ‘promoter’. C Securities and Exchange Board of India noticed ir- regularities in the matter of public issue of a company. The SEBI found that the public issue by the promoters of the company was hoax with an intention to perpetrate fraud on investors. It, Decision Date : 13-05-2008 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/4681/2006 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
134	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer J.K. INDUSTRIES LTD. & ANR Vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. – [2007] 12 S.C.R. 1362007 INSC 1161 Judge : S.H. KAPADIA,B. SUDERSHAN REDDY previously done under that rule. ( 4) Every regulation made by the Securities and Exchange Board of India under this Act shall be laid, as soon as may be after it is made, before each House of Parliament, while it is in session, for a total period of thirty days which may be comprised in Decision Date : 19-11-2007 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/3761/2007 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
135	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer VENEET AGRAWAL Vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. – [2007] 11 S.C.R. 7402007 INSC 1112 Judge : ASHOK BHAN,V.S. SIRPURKAR A VENEET AGRAWAL V. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. OCTOBER 31, 2007 B [ASHOK BHAN AND V.S. SIRPURKAR, JJ.] A “” Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992: c S. 31-Constitutionality and vi res of 199 2 Rules and Regulations challenged on the ground that procedure mandated under Principal challenge to the Rules & Regulations of 1992 is based on the contention that the Rules & Regulations were not laid before each H -\ 744 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2007] 11 S.C.R. A Houses of the Parliament as mandated by Section 31 of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, Decision Date : 31-10-2007 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/2565/2005 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
136	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer RATNABALI CAPITAL MARKETS LTD. Vs SECURITIES & EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA AND ORS. – [2007] 11 S.C.R. 6292007 INSC 1098 Judge : S.H. KAPADIA,B. SUDERSHAN REDDY RA 1NABALI CAPITAL MARKETS LTD. A V. SECURITIES & EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA AND ORS. OCTOBER 23, 2007 (~.H. KAPADIA AND B. SUDERSHAN REDDY,JJ.] B )’– ._,lr Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992: s.11 (2)-Circular dated 30. 9. 2002 stating that fresh registration c had not taken place due to D compulsion of law-Object of the Act-Discussed-Companies Act, y 1956-ss.391 to 394-SEBI (Stock-brokers and Sub-brokers) Regulations, 1992-Schedule Ill-Circular dated 30. 9. 2002-Para 7. Securities and Exchange Board of India and Stock Exchange- Functions Decision Date : 23-10-2007 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/4945/2007 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
137	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer DINESH DALMIA Vs C.B.I – [2007] 9 S.C.R. 11242007 INSC 941 Judge : S.B. SINHA,H.S. BEDI 309(2). F Interpretation of Statutes-Held: A statute must be read in its entirety- t Construction thereof should be made in such a manner, so as to give effect to all the provisions thereof CBI lodged FIR against appellant and three Companies on a complaint G from Securities and Exchange Board of India lodged a first information B report against the appellant and three companies registered and incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 on a complaint made by the Securities and Exchange Board of India . Indisputably, Appellant was named therein. He was, however, evading arrest. He had gone Decision Date : 18-09-2007 | Case No : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1249/2007 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
138	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer G.L. SULTANIA AND ANR. Vs THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA AND ORS. – [2007] 6 S.C.R. 11522007 INSC 607 Judge : B.P. SINGH,ALTAMAS KABIR B G.L. SUL TANIA AND ANR. v. THE Securities and Exchange Board of India AND ORS. MAY 16, 2007 [B.P. SINGH AND AL TAMAS KABIR, JJ.] Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992-Section 157- Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sz;bstantial Acquisition of Shares C Kumar, Sr. Adv., Amar Gupta, Somashekhar Sundaresan, Karan Vhariyog, Mayank Mishra, Inklee Barrooah, Rohini Musa, Bina Gupta, Pallavi Raj Chowdhary, Bhargava V. Desai, Rahul Gupta, Rakhi Ray and S.S. Ray for the Respondents. ,_ G.L. SUL TANIA 1·. Securities and Exchange Board of India Decision Date : 16-05-2007 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/1672/2006 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
139	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer M.S. NARAYANAN MENON @ MANI Vs STATE OF KERALA AND ANR. – [2006] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 1242006 INSC 384 Judge : S.B. SINHA,P.P. NAOLEKAR Cochin Stock Exchange has been constituted under the Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1956. It is governed by the provisions of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 as also the Securities G Contracts (Regulation) Rules, 1957 framed under the 1956 Act. The Decision Date : 04-07-2006 | Case No : CRIMINAL APPEAL/1012/1999 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
140	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer CHAIRMAN S.E.B.I. Vs SHRIRAM MUTUAL FUND AND ANR. – [2006] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 8332006 INSC 353 Judge : AR. LAKSHMANAN,LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA S.E.B.I. v. SHRJRAM MUTUAL FUND AND ANR. MAY 23, 2006 [DR. AR. LAKSHMANAN AND LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA, JJ.] SEBI (Mutual Funds) Regulations, 1996-Regulation 25(7)(9)­ Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992~ection 15(D)(b)­ Violation of terms of Certificate Regulation 15(D)(b) of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992. SEBI appointed an Adjudicating Officer to enquire into the violations. It imposed penalty of 5 lacks under Section 15 E on respondent No. 2 for failure to comply with Regulations 25(7)(a) with regard to routing of Decision Date : 23-05-2006 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/9523/2003 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
141	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer KERALA SAMSTHANA CHETHU THOZHILALI UNION Vs STATE OF KERALA AND ORS. – [2006] 3 S.C.R. 4202006 INSC 178 Judge : S.B. SINHA,P.K. BALASUBRAMANYAN Co. Ltd. v. Bombay Environmental Action Group, (2006) 3 SCALE I, C/ariant H lnternatiunal Ltd. v. Securities and Exchange Board of India , [2004] 8 sec – KERALA SAMSTHANA CHETHU THOZHILALI UNION r. STATE OF KERALA 423 524, State of Rajasthan v. Basant Nahata, 12005] 12 SCC 77, Decision Date : 24-03-2006 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/1732/2006 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
142	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer RAMESHWAR PRASAD AND ORS. Vs UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. – [2006] 1 S.C.R. 5622006 INSC 42 Judge : Y.K. SABHARWAL,K.G. BALAKRISHNAN,B.N. AGRAWAL,ASHOK BHAN,ARIJIT PASAYAT Clariant International Ltd. and Anr. v. Securities and Exchange Board of India , 120041 8 SCC 524; Smt. Shalini Soni and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors., (19801 4 SCC 544; S. Parthasarthi v. State of A.P. (1974) 3 SCC 459; State of Punjab v. V.K. Khanna and Ors., [20011 2 SCC 330; Barium Decision Date : 24-01-2006 | Case No : WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)/257/2005 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
143	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS. Vs BASANT NAHATA – [2005] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 12005 INSC 406 Judge : ASHOK BHAN,S.B. SINHA judicial review. {See Cellular Operators Association of India and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors., [2003] 3 SCC 186 and C/ariant International Ltd and Anr v. Securities and Exchange Board of India , [2004] 8 SCC 524]. F For the reasons aforementioned, we do not find any merit in this appeal Decision Date : 07-09-2005 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/7800/2001 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
144	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer TECHNIP SA Vs SMS HOLDING (PVT.) LTD. AND ORS. – [2005] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 2232005 INSC 272 Judge : RUMA PAL,ARIJIT PASAYAT,C.K. THAKKER SA v. SMS HOLDING (PVT.) LTD. AND ORS. MAY 11, 2005 [RUMA PAL, ARIJIT PASAYAT AND C.K. THAKKER, JJ.] Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992- Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeover) Regulations, I 997-Regulations I 0, I the date of acquisition. It found that Technip had Qbtained control of Coflexip in July 2001 without Public offer. SEBI directed Technip to make public announcement as required under the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeover) Regulations, Decision Date : 11-05-2005 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/9258/2003 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
145	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer SONA CHANDI OAL COMMITTEE AND ORS. Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – [2004] SUPP. 6 S.C.R. 9712004 INSC 719 Judge : ASHOK BHAN,A.K. MATHUR renewal of licence depends E upon the inspection of their accounts which is required to be carried out under the Act. [983-G-H; 985-A; 984-A-B] B.S.E. Brokers’ Forum, Bombay and Other v. Securities and Exchange Board of India and Others, (2001) 3 SCC 482; Corporation of Calcutta and F Anr. there was no element of quid pro quo as far as the administrative charges. in the hands of the sugar factory are C concerned. The administrative charges were thus held to be a tax and not a fee. A three Judge Bench of this Court in B.S.E. Brokers’ Forum, Bombay and Others v. Securities and Exchange Board of India Decision Date : 16-12-2004 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/992/2003 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
146	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer CHANDRAKANT UTTAM CHODANKAR Vs SHRI DAYANAND RAYU MANDRAKAR AND ORS. – [2004] SUPP. 6 S.C.R. 9162004 INSC 713 Judge : N. SANTOSH HEGDE,S.B. SINHA,TARUN CHATTERJEE inference that the copy filed with the petition had been attested by the respondent and that the petition did not suffer from lack of compliance with the procedural requirement.” One ofus (N. Santosh Hegde, J.) in B.S.E. Brokers Forum Bomaby and F Others v. Securities and Exchange Board of India Decision Date : 15-12-2004 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/6622/2003 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
147	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer HARINARAYAN G. BAJAJ Vs RAJESH MEGHANI AND ANR. – [2004] SUPP. 6 S.C.R. 7212004 INSC 694 Judge : RUMA PAL,ARIJIT PASAYAT,C.K. THAKKER the Board of Directors from time to time at any point of time. Not less than 60% of the members of the Defaulters’ Committee shall be from among non-trading members who shall be nominated by the Exchange with the prior approval of Securities and Exchange Board of India . Byelaw 11 on Exchange and such assets shall vest ipso facto, on declaration of any trading member as a defaulter, in the Exchange for the benefit of and on account of any dues of the Exchange, National Securities Clearing Corporation Limited, Securities and Exchange Board of India , other trading Decision Date : 06-12-2004 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/7890/2004 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
148	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer NANDKISHORE GANESH JOSHI Vs COMMISSIONER, MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF KALYAN AND DOMBIVALI AND ORS. – [2004] SUPP. 5 S.C.R. 5842004 INSC 613 Judge : N. SANTOSH HEGDE,S.B. SINHA authority, it is well-settled, must be exercised in public interest and judiciously. There is no place of any whim or caprice in exercise of such C discretionary power. [See Clariant International ltd. and Anr. v. Securities and Exchange Board of India , (2004) 7 SCALE 180]. Although Decision Date : 15-10-2004 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/6793/2004 | Disposal Nature : Leave Granted & Allowed
149	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AND ORS. Vs M/S. SHIVALIK AGRO POLY PRODUCTS AND ORS. – [2004] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 3932004 INSC 520 Judge : R.C. LAHOTI,G.P. MATHUR,C.K. THAKKER at the individual level. On these principles the appeal was allowed and the judgment of the High Court was D set aside. 14. In a recent judgment rendered in Bombay Stock Exchange Brokers’ Forum v. Securities and Exchange Board of India , [2001] 3 SCC 482 by a Bench of three learned Judges, challenge levelled against the registration fee levied by the Securities and Exchange Board of India on Stock Brokers E came up for consideration. The Bench after review of a number of earlier decisions, including Constitution Bench decision in Shirur Mutt case (supra), took note of the Decision Date : 14-09-2004 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/2122/1999 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed
150	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer SWEDISH MATCH AB AND ANR. Vs SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD, INDIA AND ANR. – [2004] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 7452004 INSC 470 Judge : N. SANTOSH HEGDE,S.B. SINHA,A.K. MATHUR legislature therein-Companies Act, 1956-Section G 81{l)(A). Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1994; Sections 15(H), (J), (Z) and 24 : Penal Provision-Interpretation of-Held: Regulation being regulatory H 745 746 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2004] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. A in nature, they do interest at such rate as the Board may determine. The provisions of Section 15H of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act mandates that a penalty of rupees twenty-five crore may be imposed. The Board does not have any discretion in the matter and, thus, the adjudication proceeding is a Decision Date : 25-08-2004 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/2361/2003 | Disposal Nature : Case Partly allowed
151	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer CLARIANT INTERNATIONAL LTD. AND ANR. Vs SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA – [2004] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 8432004 INSC 471 Judge : N. SANTOSH HEGDE,S.B. SINHA,A.K. MATHUR INTERNATIONAL LTD. AND ANR. v. Securities and Exchange Board of India AUGUST 25, 2004 (N. SANTOSH HEGDE, S.B. SINHA AND A.K. MATHUR, JJ.] Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992: Section 2(2)-“Shareholders “-Rights of-Held: Purely contractual in nature. Section 1 Appellate Tribunal is G constituted, the scrutiny at its end must be held to be of wide import. Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations, 1997: Regulation 44(i) [as inserted in 2002}. H 843 844 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2004] SUPP. 3 Decision Date : 25-08-2004 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/3183/2003 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
152	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer STATE OF GUJARAT AND ORS. Vs AKHIL GUJARAT PRAVASI V.S. MAHAMANDAL AND ORS. – [2004] 3 S.C.R. 9562004 INSC 246 Judge : S. RAJENDRA BABU,G.P. MATHUR Brokers’ Forum v. Securities and Exchange Board of India , [2001 j 3 SCC H 960 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2004) 3 S.C.R. A 482, relied on. 2.4. Entry 56 authorises a tax, the incidence of which is on goods and passengers carried by road or on inland waterways. Even though the amount of the tax Decision Date : 08-04-2004 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/6462/2001 | Direction Issue : Appeals allowed/Petitions dismissed
153	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, LUCKNOW, U.P. Vs M/S. CHHATA SUGAR CO. LTD. – [2004] 2 S.C.R. 7902004 INSC 141 Judge : V.N. KHARE,S.B. SINHA,S.H. KAPADIA Sreenivasa General Traders v. State of A.P., (19~{ 4 SCC 353; BSE Brokers’ Forum v. H 794 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2004) 2 S.C.R. A Securities and Exchange Board of India , [20011 3 SCC 482; City Corporation of Calicut v. Thachambalath Sadavisan and Ors., [1985) 2 SCC 112; Commissioner under a statute and reliance was placed on the judgment of this Court in the case of Ratilal Panachand Gandhi v. State of Bombay, reported in [1954] E SCR 1055; Sreenivasa General Traders v. State of A.P., reported in [1983] 4 SCC 353; BSE Brokers’ Forum v. Securities and Exchange Board of India , Decision Date : 27-02-2004 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/7488/2001 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
154	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer STATE OF U.P. AND ORS. Vs VAM ORGANIC CHEMICALS LTD. AND ORS. – [2003] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 9572003 INSC 566 Judge : RUMA PAL,B.N. SRIKRISHNA Thirtha Swamiar of Sri Shirur Mutt, [1954] SCR 1005, followed. ITC Ltd v. Agricultural Produce Market Committee, [2002] 9 SCC 232; Sreenivasa General Traders v. State of A.P., [1983] 4 sec 353; The F Corporation of Calcutta v. Liberty Cinema, AIR (1965) SC 1107; B.S.E. Brokers forum v. Securities and Exchange Board of India , [2001] 3 SCC 482; Secunderabad Hyderabad Hotel Owners’ Assn. v. Hyderabad Municipal Corpn., [1992] 2 SCC 274; State o/Tripura v. Sudhir Ranjan Nath, [1997] 3 sec 665; Shri Bi/eshwar Khand Udyog Khedut Sahakari G Mandali Ltd v. State a/Gujarat, [1992] 2 SCC 42; correlationship or “correspondence” has been repeatedly used by this Court either to uphold the fee holding that it was reasonable for the requirement of the authority for fulfilling its statutory obligations E (B.S.E. Brokers Forum v. Securities and Exchange Board of India , [2001] 3 SCC 482, Decision Date : 17-10-2003 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/5416/2000 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed
155	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer MORGAN STANLEY MUTUAL FUND Vs KARTICK DAS – [1994] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 1361994 INSC 220 Judge : M.N. VENKATACHALIAH,S. MOHAN,A.S. ANAND appellant is a domestic mutual fund registered with Securities and Exchange Board of India (hereinafter referred to as ‘SEBI’) under Registration No. MF/005/93/1, dated 5.11.93. The appellant is managed by B a Board of Trustees. Pursuant to the SEBI (Mutual Fund) Regulations, the constituted the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) for investors protection. On 30.1.1992, an Ordinance known as SEBI’ Or­ dinance was promulgated. On 21.2.1992, a bill was introduced namely the H SEBI Bill of 1992 which became the Act on 4th April, 1992. It came into / MORGAN Decision Date : 20-05-1994 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/4584/1994 | Disposal Nature : Disposed off
156	English           हिन्दी – Hindi Disclaimer RAYMOND SYNTHETICS LTD. AND ORS. Vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. – [1992] 1 S.C.R. 4811992 INSC 35 Judge : T.K. THOMMEN,S. MOHAN The Bombay Stock Ex- G change, however, refused to grant extension of time. It further informed the company that it was bound to pay interest by reason of the delay in the despatch of refund orders. The Securities and Exchange Board of India , the second respondent, called upon the company by amounts arose on the expiry of 10 weeks from the date of closure of the subscription lists, the Securities and D · Exchange Board of India contended that the liability ar~se on the date of E allotment. In the present appeal, however, the Union of India supports the stand of the Securities and Exchange Board of India . Decision Date : 04-02-1992 | Case No : CIVIL APPEAL/3498/1991 | Disposal Nature : Appeals(s) allowed

Landmark Judgments on SEBI By Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Landmark Judgments on SEBI By Supreme Court of India and High Courts

1	CRL.RP/1360/2015 of SRI. ARUN BALLAKUR Vs SRI. M. KRISHNA REDDY Judge : HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR court may take cognizance of offences relating to issue and transfer of securities and non-payment of dividend, on a complaint in writing, by a person authorised by the Securities and Exchange Board of India : Provided further that nothing in this sub-section shall apply to a CNR : KAHC010118472015 | Date of registration : 14-12-2015 | Decision Date : 01-03-2024 | Disposal Nature : ALLOWED Court : High Court of Karnataka
2	A.B.A./8579/2022 of MD MOKARRAM ALIAS MD MOKARRAM KHAN Vs UNION OF INDIA THROUGH C B I Judge : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI The company namely Sunshine Global Agro Limited Company was registered under the Companies Act and the company has invested into plantation of Jetropa plants in various States. He submits that the notice has been issued by Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) for stopping CNR : JHHC010327962022 | Date of registration : 23-09-2022 | Decision Date : 29-02-2024 | Disposal Nature : Rejected Court : High Court of Jharkhand
3	Cr.M.P./1241/2016 of Asit C Mehta Investment Interrmediates Ltd And Ors Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Anr Judge : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI is a SEBI ( Securities and Exchange Board of India ) registered stock broker and depository participant. He further submits that the petitioner No. 2 is the Managing Director of the petitioner company and petitioner No. 3 is whole time Director of the said company. He submits that CNR : JHHC010220992016 | Date of registration : 31-05-2016 | Decision Date : 22-02-2024 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed Court : High Court of Jharkhand
4	Cr.M.P./669/2008 of ASIT C. MEHTA INVESTMENT INTERMEDIATES LTD THR M.D Vs STATE OF JHARKHAND And ANR Judge : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI is a SEBI ( Securities and Exchange Board of India ) registered stock broker and depository participant. He further submits that the petitioner No. 2 is the Managing Director of the petitioner company and petitioner No. 3 is whole time Director of the said company. He submits that CNR : JHHC010223082008 | Date of registration : 13-05-2008 | Decision Date : 22-02-2024 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed Court : High Court of Jharkhand
5	Cr.M.P./889/2008 of HARI SHANKAR MODI Vs STATE OF JHARKHAND And ANR Judge : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI is a SEBI ( Securities and Exchange Board of India ) registered stock broker and depository participant. He further submits that the petitioner No. 2 is the Managing Director of the petitioner company and petitioner No. 3 is whole time Director of the said company. He submits that CNR : JHHC010211362008 | Date of registration : 28-06-2008 | Decision Date : 22-02-2024 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed Court : High Court of Jharkhand
6	OSA(CAD)/94/2022 of Bell Finvest India Ltd Vs Vivriti Capital Limited Judge : Honourable Mr.Justice R.SAKTHIVEL addition to, and not in derogation of, the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956), the SecuritiesContracts (Regulation) Act, 1956 (42 of 1956), the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 (15 of 1992), the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial CNR : HCMA010548912022 | Date of registration : 28-06-2022 | Decision Date : 20-02-2024 | Disposal Nature : DISMISSED Court : Madras High Court
7	FMA/4398/2016 of THE CALCUTTA STOCK EXCHANGE LIMITED Vs SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA & ORS Judge : HON’BLE JUSTICE TAPABRATA CHAKRABORTY,HON’BLE JUSTICE RAJA BASU CHOWDHURY Exchange Limited & Anr. -Versus- Securities and Exchange Board of India & Ors. with FMA 4398 of 2016 with IA No. CAN 1 of 2016 (Old No. CAN 4753 of 2016) with IA No. CAN 2 of 2016 (Old No. CAN 5172 of 2016) with IA No. CAN 3 of 2017 (Old No. CAN 9028 of 2017) with IA CAN 4 of 2020 with IA No. CAN 5 of 2021 with IA No. CAN 6 of 2023 The Calcutta Stock Exchange Limited & Anr. -Versus- Securities and Exchange Board of India & Ors. 2 For the Appellants : Mr. Soumendra Nath Mookherjee, Sr. Adv., Mr. Arunabha Deb, Mr. CNR : WBCHCA0225332016 | Date of registration : 06-05-2016 | Decision Date : 19-02-2024 | Disposal Nature : DISPOSED Court : Calcutta High Court
8	FMA/3446/2016 of THE CALCUTTA STOCK EXCHANGE LIMITED & ANR Vs SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA & ORS Judge : HON’BLE JUSTICE TAPABRATA CHAKRABORTY,HON’BLE JUSTICE RAJA BASU CHOWDHURY Exchange Limited & Anr. -Versus- Securities and Exchange Board of India & Ors. with FMA 4398 of 2016 with IA No. CAN 1 of 2016 (Old No. CAN 4753 of 2016) with IA No. CAN 2 of 2016 (Old No. CAN 5172 of 2016) with IA No. CAN 3 of 2017 (Old No. CAN 9028 of 2017) with IA CAN 4 of 2020 with IA No. CAN 5 of 2021 with IA No. CAN 6 of 2023 The Calcutta Stock Exchange Limited & Anr. -Versus- Securities and Exchange Board of India & Ors. 2 For the Appellants : Mr. Soumendra Nath Mookherjee, Sr. Adv., Mr. Arunabha Deb, Mr. CNR : WBCHCA0225312016 | Date of registration : 06-05-2016 | Decision Date : 19-02-2024 | Disposal Nature : DISPOSED Court : Calcutta High Court
9	ITA/9/2024 of SECURITIES AND EXCHANGES BOARD OF INDIA Vs INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEMPTIONS, JALANDHAR IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 2024:PHHC:021612-DB ITA-9-2024 (O&M) Date of Decision: 15.02.2024 Securities and Exchange Board of India . . . . Appellant Vs. Income Tax Officer (Exemptions), Jalandhar . . . . Respondent **** CNR : PHHC010057592024 | Date of registration : 12-01-2024 | Decision Date : 15-02-2024 | Disposal Nature : DISMISSED Court : High Court of Punjab and Haryana
10	ITA/6/2024 of SECURITIES AND EXCHANGES BOARD OF INDIA Vs INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTIONS, JALANDHAR IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 2024:PHHC: 021599 -DB ITA-6-2024 (O&M) Date of Decision: 15.02.2024 Securities and Exchange Board of India . . . . Appellant Vs. Income Tax Officer (Exemptions), Jalandhar . . . . Respondent **** CNR : PHHC010057532024 | Date of registration : 12-01-2024 | Decision Date : 15-02-2024 | Disposal Nature : DISMISSED Court : High Court of Punjab and Haryana
11	ITA/5/2024 of SECURITIES AND EXCHANGES BOARD OF INDIA Vs INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEMPTIONS JALANDHAR IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 2024:PHHC:021592-DB ITA-5-2024 (O&M) Date of Decision: 15.02.2024 Securities and Exchange Board of India . . . . Appellant Vs. Income Tax Officer (Exemptions), Jalandhar . . . . Respondent **** CNR : PHHC010057562024 | Date of registration : 12-01-2024 | Decision Date : 15-02-2024 | Disposal Nature : DISMISSED Court : High Court of Punjab and Haryana
12	ITA/8/2024 of SECURITIES AND EXCHANGES BOARD OF INDIA Vs INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTIONS, JALANDHAR 118/4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 2024:PHHC:021607-DB ITA-8-2024 (O&M) Date of Decision: 15.02.2024 Securities and Exchange Board of India . . . . Appellant Vs. Income Tax Officer (Exemptions), Jalandhar . . . . Respondent **** CNR : PHHC010057552024 | Date of registration : 12-01-2024 | Decision Date : 15-02-2024 | Disposal Nature : DISMISSED Court : High Court of Punjab and Haryana
13	ITA/7/2024 of SECURITIES AND EXCHANGES BOARD OF INDIA Vs INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEMPTIONS JALANDHAR IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 2024:PHHC:021604-DB ITA-7-2024 (O&M) Date of Decision: 15.02.2024 Securities and Exchange Board of India . . . . Appellant Vs. Income Tax Officer (Exemptions), Jalandhar . . . . Respondent **** CNR : PHHC010057582024 | Date of registration : 12-01-2024 | Decision Date : 15-02-2024 | Disposal Nature : DISMISSED Court : High Court of Punjab and Haryana
14	CEA/20/2021 of m/s INDIA ADVANTAGE FUND III Vs THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX Judge : UMESH M ADIGA,CHIEF JUSTICE No.20/2021 and Connected matters 38 • assessee’s funds are registered under VCF13 regulations issued under Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 199214 CNR : KAHC010330212021 | Date of registration : 07-09-2021 | Decision Date : 08-02-2024 | Disposal Nature : ALLOWED Court : High Court of Karnataka
15	W.P.(C)/9887/2019 of CITIZENS WHISTLE BLOWER FORUM Vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Judge : CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) to take action against IBHFL and its promoters/owners, who through its promoters, subsidiary companies and various group of companies, has been advancing dubious loans to companies owned by large corporate groups which in turn have been routing the Housing Finance Limited (IBHFL), its subsidiaries and their promoters. The petitioner has further sought directions to the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, Registrar of Companies (ROC), Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO), National Housing Bank (NHB), Reserve Bank of India (RBI), Securities CNR : DLHC010373142019 | Date of registration : 12-09-2019 | Decision Date : 02-02-2024 | Disposal Nature : Court : High Court of Delhi
16	WPC/4345/2022 of URMILA DEVI Vs THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH FINANCE SECRETARY Judge : SRI ANANDA SEN Cooperative Societies, New Delhi. 4. The Chair Person, Securities and Exchange Board of India , Mumbai. 5. The Chairman, Sahara India Pariwar, Lucknow. 6. The Zonal Manager, Sahara India Pariwar, Bokaro. 7. The Chairman, Hamara India Credit Cooperative Society, Kolkata, (West Bengal) CNR : JHHC010299462022 | Date of registration : 02-09-2022 | Decision Date : 01-02-2024 | Disposal Nature : Withdrawn Court : High Court of Jharkhand
17	WPC/4347/2022 of KUMARI BABITA Vs THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH FINANCE SECRETARY Judge : SRI ANANDA SEN Cooperative Societies, New Delhi. 4. The Chair Person, Securities and Exchange Board of India , Mumbai. 5. The Chairman, Sahara India Pariwar, Lucknow. 6. The Zonal Manager, Sahara India Pariwar, Bokaro. 7. The Chairman, Hamara India Credit Cooperative Society, Kolkata, (West Bengal) CNR : JHHC010299412022 | Date of registration : 02-09-2022 | Decision Date : 01-02-2024 | Disposal Nature : Withdrawn Court : High Court of Jharkhand
18	WP/11886/2020 of S.Madhusudhanan, Vs The Recovery Officer/ Deputy General Manager, Judge : Honourable Mr Justice S.M. SUBRAMANIAM Securities and Exchange Board of India , Southern Regional Office, Overseas Tower, 7th floor, 756/C, Annasalai, Chennai – 600 002. 2.The Manager, Securities and Exchange Board of India , Southern Regional Office, Overseas Tower, 7th Floor, 756/C, Annasalai, Writ Petition stands dismissed as infructuous. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 30.01.2024 veda Index : Yes / No Speaking order / Non-Speaking Order Neutral Citation : Yes / No To 1.The Recovery Officer/Deputy General Manager, Securities and Exchange Board of India , CNR : HCMA010774192020 | Date of registration : 28-08-2020 | Decision Date : 30-01-2024 | Disposal Nature : DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS Court : Madras High Court
19	WPO/1755/2023 of RAM KUMAR JHA Vs THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS Judge : HON’BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA cites Chintalapati Srinivasa Raju Vs. Securities and Exchange Board of India reported at (2018) 7 SCC 443 for the proposition that no judgment or order can be passed beyond the Show-cause Notice. 14. Learned counsel next cites Khem Chand Vs. Union of India and others, reported at AIR CNR : WBCHCO0052642023 | Date of registration : 18-10-2023 | Decision Date : 30-01-2024 | Disposal Nature : ALLOWED Court : Calcutta High Court
20	ITXA/1169/2018 of COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (IT)-2 Vs HSBC BANK (MAURITIUS) LIMITED Judge : HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE K.R. SHRIRAM,HON’BLE JUSTICE DR. NEELA KEDAR GOKHALE Company incorporated and registered in and tax resident of Mauritius. It is admittedly a Foreign Institutional Investor (“FII”) duly licensed by the Securities and Exchange Board of India (“SEBI”). During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer (“AO”) noticed CNR : HCBM020218832017 | Date of registration : 20-04-2018 | Decision Date : 24-01-2024 | Disposal Nature : DISPOSED OFF Court : Bombay High Court
21	WP/1313/2024 of VIJAY SINGH TOMAR Vs SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA THROUGH ITS DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER JAIN S/O BIRENDRA JAIN, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, OCCUPATION: BUSINESS 238/A VINA NAGAR, INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH) …..PETITIONER SHRI MANISH GUPTA, ADVOCATE AND Securities and Exchange Board of India THROUGH ITS DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER DIVISIONAL ENGINEER 104-105 SATGURU PARINAY OPP. C21 MALL of the remedy of the Appeal as available under Section 15T of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992. 2. Prayer is allowed. 3. It is made clear that the time spent by the petitioner in prosecuting the petition shall be excluded from the period of limitation and although CNR : MPHC020019972024 | Date of registration : 16-01-2024 | Decision Date : 22-01-2024 | Disposal Nature : Withdrawn Court : High Court of Madhya Pradesh
22	WP/1307/2024 of VISHAL LATH Vs SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA THROUGH ITS DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER SHRI MANISH GUPTA-ADVOCATE) AND Securities and Exchange Board of India THROUGH ITS DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER ADDRESS 104-105 SATGURU PARINAY OPP. C21 MALL A.B. ROAD INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH) …..RESPONDENTS (BY SHRI YASHOVARDHAN SINGH- GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE) This petition under the provision of Securities and Exchange Board of India , Act, 1992 ( in short ” Act, 1992) are altogether different, therefore, on the pretext of the pendency of the trial, the proceedings in pursuance to the show cause notice should not have been stayed. Heard. 4. The petitioner CNR : MPHC020019892024 | Date of registration : 16-01-2024 | Decision Date : 22-01-2024 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed Court : High Court of Madhya Pradesh
23	WP/3528/2022 of GAGAN MAKAR SINGH AND ANR. Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR. Judge : HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRAKASH D. NAIK general allegations against all directors without any specific role. There was material to show that petitioner is independent director in the company. 16. In Chintalapati Srinivasa Raju Vs. Securities and Exchange Board of India (supra) it is observed as follows:- “23. CNR : HCBM010394752022 | Date of registration : 28-09-2022 | Decision Date : 16-01-2024 | Disposal Nature : Allowed Court : Bombay High Court
24	LPA/48/2024 of BHARAT NIDHI LIMITED Vs SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA & ORS. Judge : , Jayant Mehta, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Manu Nair, Mr. Ameya Gokhale, Mr. Vaibhav Singh, Ms. Radhika, Mr. Neelabu Shreesh, Ms. Riya Basu, Ms. Simran Malhotra and Mr. Manas Kotak, Advocates versus Securities and Exchange Board of India & ORS. ….. Respondents Through: Mr. Securities and Exchange Board of India & ORS. ….. Respondents Through: Mr. J.J. Bhatt, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Abhishek Baid, Mr. Mohit Kumar Bafna, Mr. Praneet Das, Mr. Anuj Jain, Mr. Ashok Kumar, Mr. Arnav Mishra, Advocates for R-1 47. + LPA 49/2024 & CAV 16/2024, CNR : DLHC010586782023 | Date of registration : 12-01-2024 | Decision Date : 15-01-2024 | Disposal Nature : Court : High Court of Delhi
25	LPA/49/2024 of MATRIX MERCHANDISE LIMITED & ORS. Vs SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA & ORS. Judge : , Jayant Mehta, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Manu Nair, Mr. Ameya Gokhale, Mr. Vaibhav Singh, Ms. Radhika, Mr. Neelabu Shreesh, Ms. Riya Basu, Ms. Simran Malhotra and Mr. Manas Kotak, Advocates versus Securities and Exchange Board of India & ORS. ….. Respondents Through: Mr. Securities and Exchange Board of India & ORS. ….. Respondents Through: Mr. J.J. Bhatt, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Abhishek Baid, Mr. Mohit Kumar Bafna, Mr. Praneet Das, Mr. Anuj Jain, Mr. Ashok Kumar, Mr. Arnav Mishra, Advocates for R-1 47. + LPA 49/2024 & CAV 16/2024, CNR : DLHC010586792023 | Date of registration : 12-01-2024 | Decision Date : 15-01-2024 | Disposal Nature : Court : High Court of Delhi
26	LPA/47/2024 of ASHOKA MARKETING LIMITED & ANR. Vs SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA & ORS. Judge : , Jayant Mehta, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Manu Nair, Mr. Ameya Gokhale, Mr. Vaibhav Singh, Ms. Radhika, Mr. Neelabu Shreesh, Ms. Riya Basu, Ms. Simran Malhotra and Mr. Manas Kotak, Advocates versus Securities and Exchange Board of India & ORS. ….. Respondents Through: Mr. Securities and Exchange Board of India & ORS. ….. Respondents Through: Mr. J.J. Bhatt, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Abhishek Baid, Mr. Mohit Kumar Bafna, Mr. Praneet Das, Mr. Anuj Jain, Mr. Ashok Kumar, Mr. Arnav Mishra, Advocates for R-1 47. + LPA 49/2024 & CAV 16/2024, CNR : DLHC010586772023 | Date of registration : 12-01-2024 | Decision Date : 15-01-2024 | Disposal Nature : Court : High Court of Delhi
27	WP/19144/2023 of UMESH KUMAR GUPTA Vs THE COLLECTOR derogation of, the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956), the Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1956 (42 of 1956), the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 (15 of 1992), the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (51 of 1993) or any other law take effect in addition to and not in derogation of Companies Act, 1956, Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1956 Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992, and Recovery of – 5 – Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 and any other law for the CNR : MPHC010448672023 | Date of registration : 31-07-2023 | Decision Date : 12-01-2024 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed Court : High Court of Madhya Pradesh
28	BA/1064/2023 of VIVEK SUKHCHAND MOHANE Vs STATE OF MAH. THR. THE INVESTIGATION OFFICER, PS GITTIKHADAN TALUKA AND DIST. NAGPUR. Judge : HON’BLE JUSTICE URMILA JOSHI PHALKE Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI). The informant and other investors have invested the amount subjected to the market risk. At the most, the act attributed against the present applicant that he has suggested them to invest the amount in the share market. Merely, CNR : HCBM040318262023 | Date of registration : 08-11-2023 | Decision Date : 12-01-2024 | Disposal Nature : ALLOWED Court : Bombay High Court
29	WP/13478/2020 of R.Subramanian Vs The Secretary Judge : Honourable Mr Justice D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY The Chairman Securities and Exchange Board of India Plot No.C4-A, ‘G’ Block Bandrakurla Complex, Bandra (East) Mumbai 400 051. __________ Page 1 of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.13478 of 2020 4. The Managing Director The Lakshmi Vilas Bank Corporate Office, an Administrator and by suspending the Board under the provisions of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 and Reserve Bank of India Regulations as well as Securities and Exchange Board of India (Listing Obligations and Disclosure Requirements) Regulations, 2015, in order to ensure the CNR : HCMA010881402020 | Date of registration : 21-09-2020 | Decision Date : 12-01-2024 | Disposal Nature : DISPOSED OF Court : Madras High Court
30	APL/237/2023 of ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA S/O LT. SH. R.K. GUPTA Vs CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION AND ANR Judge : HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE BHARATI DANGRE is entitled for the same, in the wake of the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Reliance Industries Limited Vs. Securities and Exchange Board of India & Ors. 2(Cri. Appeal No.1167 of 2022), wherein it is held that all the relevant documents must be supplied to the accused for CNR : HCBM010094922023 | Date of registration : 01-03-2023 | Decision Date : 08-01-2024 | Disposal Nature : Disposed Off Court : Bombay High Court
31	CRL OP(MD)/23063/2023 of Mariappan Vs The Inspector of Police Judge : Honourable Mr Justice M.DHANDAPANI Commissioner to settle the amount to the Investors. Now, the issue is pending before the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) and the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India. Further, the petitioners are ready and willing to deposit a 2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD) CNR : HCMD011425542023 | Date of registration : 19-12-2023 | Decision Date : 05-01-2024 | Disposal Nature : GRANTED Court : Madras High Court
32	WPA/19815/2023 of SUDIP DEBNATH Vs S.E.B.I. AND ORS Judge : HON’BLE JUSTICE MD. NIZAMUDDIN WPA 19815 OF 2023 + CAN 1 of 2023 05.01.2024 Sl no. 30 Sudip Debnath Ct no. 2 – Vs – P.M. Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) & Ors. Mr. Rajendra Kr. Nandi … for the petitioner. Mr. Mayukh Roy … for the CNR : WBCHCA0399932023 | Date of registration : 14-08-2023 | Decision Date : 05-01-2024 | Disposal Nature : DISMISSED Court : Calcutta High Court
33	CRL.RP/1132/2017 of SRI. NANJESHA @ ASHOKA Vs M. P. HARISHA Judge : ANIL B KATTI contention relied on the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in A.R.Dahiya Vs. Securities and Exchange Board of India . Wherein, it has been held that in terms – 16 – CRL.RP No. 1132 of 2017 of Section 6 of N.I.Act post dated cheque held by the complainant amounts to promise CNR : KAHC010447922017 | Date of registration : 03-11-2017 | Decision Date : 04-01-2024 | Disposal Nature : DISMISSED Court : High Court of Karnataka
34	WP/1766/2019 of Rakesh P Sheth Vs The Securities and Exchange Board of India Judge : Honourable Mr Justice D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY .. Petitioner -vs- 1. The Securities and Exchange Board of India , Plot No.C 4-A, G Block, Near Bank of India, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai, Maharashtra 400 051. 2. Ministry of Corporate Affairs, ‘A’ Wing, Shastri Bhavan, Rajendra Prasad Road, New Delhi 110 (D.B.C., J.) 02.01.2024 Index : Yes/No Neutral Citation : Yes/No sra Page 3 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No.1766 of 2019 THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J. (sra) To 1. The Securities and Exchange Board of India , CNR : HCMA010116682019 | Date of registration : 22-01-2019 | Decision Date : 02-01-2024 | Disposal Nature : WITHDRAWN DISMISSED Court : Madras High Court
35	REVN/176/2017 of JAYENDRASINH PADMASINH RATHOD Vs SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Judge : HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.176 OF 2017 Jayendrasinh Padmasinh Rathod ] Applicant vs. Securities and Exchange Board of India ] and another ] Respondents ….. None for the CNR : HCBM010132432017 | Date of registration : 22-03-2017 | Decision Date : 22-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed Court : Bombay High Court
36	W.P.(C)/14545/2023 of MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI Vs SMT. MANEESHA JUNEJA Reliance in this regard was placed on the following decisions: Prabhavati Ramgarib B. vs. Divisional Railway Manager, 2010 SCC OnLine Bom 171; Dushyant N. Dayal and Ors. vs. Securities and Exchange Board of India , (2017) 9 SCC 660; Prabhakar Kisan Magar and Ors. vs. The Divisional CNR : DLHC010447922023 | Date of registration : 06-11-2023 | Decision Date : 21-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : Court : High Court of Delhi
37	W.P.(C)/14185/2023 of MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI Vs SH. RAKESH MANN Reliance in this regard was placed on the following decisions: Prabhavati Ramgarib B. vs. Divisional Railway Manager, 2010 SCC OnLine Bom 171; Dushyant N. Dayal and Ors. vs. Securities and Exchange Board of India , (2017) 9 SCC 660; Prabhakar Kisan Magar and Ors. vs. The Divisional CNR : DLHC010435592023 | Date of registration : 31-10-2023 | Decision Date : 21-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : Court : High Court of Delhi
38	CO.APP./31/2023 of ANIL KUMAR CHANDRA PRAKASH SHAH Vs SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA & ORS. Judge : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU, with Mr. Sanjay Abbot and Sidhant Kumar, Advs. versus Securities and Exchange Board of India & ORS. ….. Respondents Through: Mr. Aman Leekha, Adv. for R-2/Spl. Committee CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA winding up petition being CP No.191/1997 before the learned Company Court. In the meanwhile, the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) also filed a trust petition being Trust Petition No.3/1997 before the Bombay High Court and a Provisional Administrator was appointed by the CNR : DLHC010553772023 | Date of registration : 20-12-2023 | Decision Date : 21-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : Court : High Court of Delhi
39	W.P.(C)/14183/2023 of MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI Vs SH. KULWANT SINGH Reliance in this regard was placed on the following decisions: Prabhavati Ramgarib B. vs. Divisional Railway Manager, 2010 SCC OnLine Bom 171; Dushyant N. Dayal and Ors. vs. Securities and Exchange Board of India , (2017) 9 SCC 660; Prabhakar Kisan Magar and Ors. vs. The Divisional CNR : DLHC010435562023 | Date of registration : 31-10-2023 | Decision Date : 21-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : Court : High Court of Delhi
40	WP(MD)/27835/2023 of Gautami Tadimalla Vs The District Collector Judge : Honourable Mr Justice G.R.SWAMINATHAN Muthukulathur, Ramanathapuram District. 3.The District Registrar, Ramanathapuram District, Ramanathapuram. 4.The Sub Registrar, Muthukulathur Sub Registrar Office, Muthukulathur, Ramanathapuram District. 5.The Recovery Officer, Securities and Exchange Board of India , Muthukulathur Taluk, Muthukulathur, Ramanathapuram District. 3.The District Registrar, Ramanathapuram District, Ramanathapuram. 4.The Sub Registrar, Muthukulathur Sub Registrar Office, Muthukulathur, Ramanathapuram District. 5.The Recovery Officer, Securities and Exchange Board of India , Chennai. 5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J. SKM WP(MD)No.27835 of CNR : HCMD011304872023 | Date of registration : 22-11-2023 | Decision Date : 21-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : DISPOSED OF Court : Madras High Court
41	WP(Crl.)/318/2022 of SALIL RAVEENDRAN Vs UNION OF INDIA Judge : HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH Another v. Union of India and Others [(2017) 10 SCC 1], Sahara India Real Estate Corporation Limited and Others v. Securities and Exchange Board of India and Another [(2012) 10 SCC 603], Manu Sharma v. State (NCT) of Delhi [(2010) 6 SCC 1], R.Rajagopal v. State of Tamil CNR : KLHC010255962022 | Date of registration : 05-04-2022 | Decision Date : 21-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : DISPOSED OF Court : High Court of Kerala
42	W.P.(C)/14578/2023 of MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI Vs SH. HARISH RAM ARYA Reliance in this regard was placed on the following decisions: Prabhavati Ramgarib B. vs. Divisional Railway Manager, 2010 SCC OnLine Bom 171; Dushyant N. Dayal and Ors. vs. Securities and Exchange Board of India , (2017) 9 SCC 660; Prabhakar Kisan Magar and Ors. vs. The Divisional CNR : DLHC010449262023 | Date of registration : 06-11-2023 | Decision Date : 21-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : Court : High Court of Delhi
43	W.P.(C)/14480/2023 of MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI Vs SMT. REKHA VASHISHTH Reliance in this regard was placed on the following decisions: Prabhavati Ramgarib B. vs. Divisional Railway Manager, 2010 SCC OnLine Bom 171; Dushyant N. Dayal and Ors. vs. Securities and Exchange Board of India , (2017) 9 SCC 660; Prabhakar Kisan Magar and Ors. vs. The Divisional CNR : DLHC010446412023 | Date of registration : 04-11-2023 | Decision Date : 21-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : Court : High Court of Delhi
44	W.P.(C)/14213/2023 of MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI Vs SHRI SANDEEP KHURANA Reliance in this regard was placed on the following decisions: Prabhavati Ramgarib B. vs. Divisional Railway Manager, 2010 SCC OnLine Bom 171; Dushyant N. Dayal and Ors. vs. Securities and Exchange Board of India , (2017) 9 SCC 660; Prabhakar Kisan Magar and Ors. vs. The Divisional CNR : DLHC010436492023 | Date of registration : 31-10-2023 | Decision Date : 21-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : Court : High Court of Delhi
45	W.P.(C)/14184/2023 of MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI Vs SH. MAHIPAL Reliance in this regard was placed on the following decisions: Prabhavati Ramgarib B. vs. Divisional Railway Manager, 2010 SCC OnLine Bom 171; Dushyant N. Dayal and Ors. vs. Securities and Exchange Board of India , (2017) 9 SCC 660; Prabhakar Kisan Magar and Ors. vs. The Divisional CNR : DLHC010435582023 | Date of registration : 31-10-2023 | Decision Date : 21-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : Court : High Court of Delhi
46	W.P.(C)/14544/2023 of MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI Vs SH. AMAN SEHRAWAT Reliance in this regard was placed on the following decisions: Prabhavati Ramgarib B. vs. Divisional Railway Manager, 2010 SCC OnLine Bom 171; Dushyant N. Dayal and Ors. vs. Securities and Exchange Board of India , (2017) 9 SCC 660; Prabhakar Kisan Magar and Ors. vs. The Divisional CNR : DLHC010447892023 | Date of registration : 06-11-2023 | Decision Date : 21-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : Court : High Court of Delhi
47	W.P.(C)/14483/2023 of MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI Vs SHRI MAHESH KUMAR Reliance in this regard was placed on the following decisions: Prabhavati Ramgarib B. vs. Divisional Railway Manager, 2010 SCC OnLine Bom 171; Dushyant N. Dayal and Ors. vs. Securities and Exchange Board of India , (2017) 9 SCC 660; Prabhakar Kisan Magar and Ors. vs. The Divisional CNR : DLHC010446442023 | Date of registration : 04-11-2023 | Decision Date : 21-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : Court : High Court of Delhi
48	WP/6203/2023 of MR. Y .B. SHAMANNA Vs THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER , Judge : M.NAGAPRASANNA Section 37, namely, the Companies Act, 1956; the Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1956; the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992; the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, or any other law for the time being in force.” xxx xxx xxx 53 29. The aforesaid CNR : KAHC010148232023 | Date of registration : 16-03-2023 | Decision Date : 20-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : REJECTED Court : High Court of Karnataka
49	WP/19203/2022 of RAJESH DWIVEDI Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH The Supreme Court in case of Nirma Industries Limited and another Vs. Securities and Exchange Board of India reported in (2013) 8 SCC 20 has held as under: 30. In B. Karunakar [(1993) 4 SCC 727 : 1993 SCC (L&S) 1184 : (1993) 25 ATC 704] , having defined the meaning of “civil CNR : MPHC010447602022 | Date of registration : 23-08-2022 | Decision Date : 19-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : Dismissed Court : High Court of Madhya Pradesh
50	CRR/3196/2018 of M/S S.K. KHEMKA Vs SECURITIES & EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA(SEBI) Judge : HON’BLE JUSTICE BIBHAS RANJAN DE 07 19.12.2023 Court No.237 RUP. IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CRIMINAL REVISIONAL JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE CRR 3196 of 2018 M/s. S.K. Khemka Vs. Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) Mr. P.K. Dutt Mr. S.K. Dutt Mr. Syamantak CNR : WBCHCA0452372018 | Date of registration : 12-10-2018 | Decision Date : 19-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : DISMISSED Court : Calcutta High Court
51	W.P.(CRL)/544/2020 of DR. ARUN MOHAN Vs CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Professional is not a public servant which is evident from the fact that where the RP is to be treated as a public servant, the Legislature has expressly provided for the same. Reliance is placed upon Securities and Exchange Board of India (Appointment of Administrator and Procedure for Refunding considered by this Court while examining the present legal issue is the promulgation of Securities and Exchange Board of India (Appointment of Administrator and Procedure for Refunding to the Investors) Regulations, in the year 2018, whereby the Administrator to be appointed ought to be an CNR : DLHC010134352020 | Date of registration : 22-02-2020 | Decision Date : 18-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : Court : High Court of Delhi
52	W.P.(C)/15556/2023 of BHARAT NIDHI LIMITED Vs SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA & ORS. Advocates.) AND Securities and Exchange Board of India Having its headquarters at SEBI Bhavan, Plot No. C 4-A, G Block, Near Bank of India, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai – 400051. Also having office at: NBCC Complex, Office Tower-1, 8th Floor, – 2 – Vaibhav Singh, Ms. Radhika I, Mr. Riya Basu, Ms. Simran Malhotra, Mr. Manas Kotak and Ms. Riya Kumar, Advocates.) AND Securities and Exchange Board of India Having its headquarters at SEBI Bhavan, Plot No. C 4-A, G Block, Near Bank of India, – 4 – Bandra CNR : DLHC010485932023 | Date of registration : 02-12-2023 | Decision Date : 18-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : Court : High Court of Delhi
53	W.P.(C)/15558/2023 of MATRIX MERCHANDISE LIMITED & ORS. Vs SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA & ORS. Advocates.) AND Securities and Exchange Board of India Having its headquarters at SEBI Bhavan, Plot No. C 4-A, G Block, Near Bank of India, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai – 400051. Also having office at: NBCC Complex, Office Tower-1, 8th Floor, – 2 – Vaibhav Singh, Ms. Radhika I, Mr. Riya Basu, Ms. Simran Malhotra, Mr. Manas Kotak and Ms. Riya Kumar, Advocates.) AND Securities and Exchange Board of India Having its headquarters at SEBI Bhavan, Plot No. C 4-A, G Block, Near Bank of India, – 4 – Bandra CNR : DLHC010485962023 | Date of registration : 02-12-2023 | Decision Date : 18-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : Court : High Court of Delhi
54	W.P.(C)/15557/2023 of ASHOKA MARKETING LIMITED & ANR. Vs SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA & ORS. Advocates.) AND Securities and Exchange Board of India Having its headquarters at SEBI Bhavan, Plot No. C 4-A, G Block, Near Bank of India, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai – 400051. Also having office at: NBCC Complex, Office Tower-1, 8th Floor, – 2 – Vaibhav Singh, Ms. Radhika I, Mr. Riya Basu, Ms. Simran Malhotra, Mr. Manas Kotak and Ms. Riya Kumar, Advocates.) AND Securities and Exchange Board of India Having its headquarters at SEBI Bhavan, Plot No. C 4-A, G Block, Near Bank of India, – 4 – Bandra CNR : DLHC010485942023 | Date of registration : 02-12-2023 | Decision Date : 18-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : Court : High Court of Delhi
55	OCO/26/2020 of ADITYA VIKRAM LODHA Vs ARVIND KUMAR NEWAR AND ORS. Judge : THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON’BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations. It is further submitted that as per Section 152(2) of the Companies Act, 2013, directors are appointed by the company in the General Meeting of its shareholders. As per Section CNR : WBCHCO0017612020 | Date of registration : 03-12-2020 | Decision Date : 14-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : DISPOSED Court : Calcutta High Court
56	OCO/6/2020 of HARSH VARDHAN LODHA Vs ARVIND KUMAR NEWAR AND ORS. Judge : THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON’BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations. It is further submitted that as per Section 152(2) of the Companies Act, 2013, directors are appointed by the company in the General Meeting of its shareholders. As per Section CNR : WBCHCO0016232020 | Date of registration : 18-11-2020 | Decision Date : 14-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : DISPOSED Court : Calcutta High Court
57	OCO/22/2020 of VINDHYA TELELINKS LIMITED Vs ARVIND KUMAR NEWAR AND ORS. Judge : THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON’BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations. It is further submitted that as per Section 152(2) of the Companies Act, 2013, directors are appointed by the company in the General Meeting of its shareholders. As per Section CNR : WBCHCO0017512020 | Date of registration : 03-12-2020 | Decision Date : 14-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : DISPOSED Court : Calcutta High Court
58	OCO/15/2020 of MEENAKSHI PERIWAL Vs ARVIND KUMAR NEWAR AND ORS. Judge : THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON’BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations. It is further submitted that as per Section 152(2) of the Companies Act, 2013, directors are appointed by the company in the General Meeting of its shareholders. As per Section CNR : WBCHCO0016962020 | Date of registration : 27-11-2020 | Decision Date : 14-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : DISPOSED Court : Calcutta High Court
59	OCO/14/2020 of HARSH VARDHAN LODHA Vs ARVIND KUMAR NEWAR AND ORS. Judge : THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON’BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations. It is further submitted that as per Section 152(2) of the Companies Act, 2013, directors are appointed by the company in the General Meeting of its shareholders. As per Section CNR : WBCHCO0016952020 | Date of registration : 27-11-2020 | Decision Date : 14-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : DISPOSED Court : Calcutta High Court
60	APO/94/2020 of MEENAKSHI PERIWAL Vs ARVIND KUMAR NEWAR AND ORS. Judge : THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON’BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations. It is further submitted that as per Section 152(2) of the Companies Act, 2013, directors are appointed by the company in the General Meeting of its shareholders. As per Section of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations. It is further submitted that as per Section 152(2) of the Companies Act, 2013, directors are appointed by the company in the General Meeting of its shareholders. As per Section CNR : WBCHCO0011852020 | Date of registration : 22-09-2020 | Decision Date : 14-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : DISPOSED Court : Calcutta High Court
61	OCO/20/2020 of UNIVERSAL CABLES LIMITED Vs ARVIND KUMAR NEWAR AND ORS. Judge : THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON’BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations. It is further submitted that as per Section 152(2) of the Companies Act, 2013, directors are appointed by the company in the General Meeting of its shareholders. As per Section CNR : WBCHCO0017482020 | Date of registration : 03-12-2020 | Decision Date : 14-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : DISPOSED Court : Calcutta High Court
62	OCO/4/2020 of BIRLA CABLE LIMITED Vs ARVIND KUMAR NEWAR AND ORS. Judge : THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON’BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations. It is further submitted that as per Section 152(2) of the Companies Act, 2013, directors are appointed by the company in the General Meeting of its shareholders. As per Section CNR : WBCHCO0016212020 | Date of registration : 18-11-2020 | Decision Date : 14-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : DISPOSED Court : Calcutta High Court
63	APO/91/2020 of VINDHYA TELELINKS LTD Vs ARVIND KUMAR NEWAR AND ORS Judge : THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON’BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations. It is further submitted that as per Section 152(2) of the Companies Act, 2013, directors are appointed by the company in the General Meeting of its shareholders. As per Section of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations. It is further submitted that as per Section 152(2) of the Companies Act, 2013, directors are appointed by the company in the General Meeting of its shareholders. As per Section CNR : WBCHCO0011772020 | Date of registration : 21-09-2020 | Decision Date : 14-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : DISPOSED Court : Calcutta High Court
64	OCO/11/2020 of UNIVERSAL CABLES LIMITED Vs ARVIND KUMAR NEWAR AND ANR. Judge : THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON’BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations. It is further submitted that as per Section 152(2) of the Companies Act, 2013, directors are appointed by the company in the General Meeting of its shareholders. As per Section CNR : WBCHCO0016922020 | Date of registration : 27-11-2020 | Decision Date : 14-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : DISPOSED Court : Calcutta High Court
65	OCO/24/2020 of MEENAKSHI PERIWAL Vs ARVIND KUMAR NEWAR AND ORS. Judge : THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON’BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations. It is further submitted that as per Section 152(2) of the Companies Act, 2013, directors are appointed by the company in the General Meeting of its shareholders. As per Section CNR : WBCHCO0017562020 | Date of registration : 03-12-2020 | Decision Date : 14-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : DISPOSED Court : Calcutta High Court
66	APO/92/2020 of HARSH VARDHAN LODHA Vs ARVIND KUMAR NEWAR AND ORS Judge : THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON’BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations. It is further submitted that as per Section 152(2) of the Companies Act, 2013, directors are appointed by the company in the General Meeting of its shareholders. As per Section of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations. It is further submitted that as per Section 152(2) of the Companies Act, 2013, directors are appointed by the company in the General Meeting of its shareholders. As per Section CNR : WBCHCO0011782020 | Date of registration : 21-09-2020 | Decision Date : 14-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : DISPOSED Court : Calcutta High Court
67	APO/98/2020 of ADITYA VIKRAM LODHA Vs ARVIND KUMAR NEWAR AND ORS Judge : THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON’BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations. It is further submitted that as per Section 152(2) of the Companies Act, 2013, directors are appointed by the company in the General Meeting of its shareholders. As per Section of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations. It is further submitted that as per Section 152(2) of the Companies Act, 2013, directors are appointed by the company in the General Meeting of its shareholders. As per Section CNR : WBCHCO0011992020 | Date of registration : 23-09-2020 | Decision Date : 14-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : DISPOSED Court : Calcutta High Court
68	OCO/7/2020 of MEENAKSHI PERIWAL Vs ARVIND KUMAR NEWAR AND ORS. Judge : THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON’BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations. It is further submitted that as per Section 152(2) of the Companies Act, 2013, directors are appointed by the company in the General Meeting of its shareholders. As per Section CNR : WBCHCO0016242020 | Date of registration : 18-11-2020 | Decision Date : 14-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : DISPOSED Court : Calcutta High Court
69	OCO/25/2020 of BIRLA CORPORATION LIMITED Vs ARVIND KUMAR NEWAR AND ORS. Judge : THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON’BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations. It is further submitted that as per Section 152(2) of the Companies Act, 2013, directors are appointed by the company in the General Meeting of its shareholders. As per Section CNR : WBCHCO0017572020 | Date of registration : 03-12-2020 | Decision Date : 14-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : DISPOSED Court : Calcutta High Court
70	OCO/9/2020 of SHREYAS MEDICAL SOCIETY Vs ARVIND KUMAR NEWAR AND ORS. Judge : THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON’BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations. It is further submitted that as per Section 152(2) of the Companies Act, 2013, directors are appointed by the company in the General Meeting of its shareholders. As per Section CNR : WBCHCO0016262020 | Date of registration : 18-11-2020 | Decision Date : 14-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : DISPOSED Court : Calcutta High Court
71	APO/96/2020 of SHREYAS MEDICAL SOCIETY Vs ARVIND KUMAR NEWAR AND ORS Judge : THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON’BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations. It is further submitted that as per Section 152(2) of the Companies Act, 2013, directors are appointed by the company in the General Meeting of its shareholders. As per Section of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations. It is further submitted that as per Section 152(2) of the Companies Act, 2013, directors are appointed by the company in the General Meeting of its shareholders. As per Section CNR : WBCHCO0011872020 | Date of registration : 23-09-2020 | Decision Date : 14-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : DISPOSED Court : Calcutta High Court
72	APO/95/2020 of BIRLA CORPORATION LIMITED Vs ARVIND KUMAR NEWAR AND ORS. Judge : THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON’BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations. It is further submitted that as per Section 152(2) of the Companies Act, 2013, directors are appointed by the company in the General Meeting of its shareholders. As per Section of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations. It is further submitted that as per Section 152(2) of the Companies Act, 2013, directors are appointed by the company in the General Meeting of its shareholders. As per Section CNR : WBCHCO0011862020 | Date of registration : 22-09-2020 | Decision Date : 14-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : DISPOSED Court : Calcutta High Court
73	OCO/13/2020 of VINDHYA TELELINKS LIMITED Vs ARVIND KUMAR NEWAR AND ORS. Judge : THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON’BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations. It is further submitted that as per Section 152(2) of the Companies Act, 2013, directors are appointed by the company in the General Meeting of its shareholders. As per Section CNR : WBCHCO0016942020 | Date of registration : 27-11-2020 | Decision Date : 14-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : DISPOSED Court : Calcutta High Court
74	OCO/10/2020 of ADITYA VIKRAM LODHA Vs ARVIND KUMAR NEWAR AND ORS. Judge : THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON’BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations. It is further submitted that as per Section 152(2) of the Companies Act, 2013, directors are appointed by the company in the General Meeting of its shareholders. As per Section CNR : WBCHCO0016272020 | Date of registration : 18-11-2020 | Decision Date : 14-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : DISPOSED Court : Calcutta High Court
75	OCO/23/2020 of HARSH VARDHAN LODHA Vs ARVIND KUMAR NEWAR AND ORS. Judge : THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON’BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations. It is further submitted that as per Section 152(2) of the Companies Act, 2013, directors are appointed by the company in the General Meeting of its shareholders. As per Section CNR : WBCHCO0017532020 | Date of registration : 03-12-2020 | Decision Date : 14-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : DISPOSED Court : Calcutta High Court
76	OCO/18/2020 of ADITYA VIKRAM LODHA Vs ARVIND KUMAR NEWAR AND ORS. Judge : THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON’BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations. It is further submitted that as per Section 152(2) of the Companies Act, 2013, directors are appointed by the company in the General Meeting of its shareholders. As per Section CNR : WBCHCO0017002020 | Date of registration : 27-11-2020 | Decision Date : 14-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : DISPOSED Court : Calcutta High Court
77	OCO/16/2020 of BIRLA CORPORATION LIMITED Vs ARVIND KUMAR NEWAR ANR ORS. Judge : THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON’BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations. It is further submitted that as per Section 152(2) of the Companies Act, 2013, directors are appointed by the company in the General Meeting of its shareholders. As per Section CNR : WBCHCO0016972020 | Date of registration : 27-11-2020 | Decision Date : 14-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : DISPOSED Court : Calcutta High Court
78	OCO/5/2020 of VINDHYA TELELINKS LIMITED Vs ARVIND KUMAR NEWAR AND ORS. Judge : THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON’BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations. It is further submitted that as per Section 152(2) of the Companies Act, 2013, directors are appointed by the company in the General Meeting of its shareholders. As per Section CNR : WBCHCO0016222020 | Date of registration : 18-11-2020 | Decision Date : 14-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : DISPOSED Court : Calcutta High Court
79	APO/90/2020 of BIRLA CABLE LTD Vs ARVIND KUMAR NEWAR AND ORS Judge : THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON’BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations. It is further submitted that as per Section 152(2) of the Companies Act, 2013, directors are appointed by the company in the General Meeting of its shareholders. As per Section of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations. It is further submitted that as per Section 152(2) of the Companies Act, 2013, directors are appointed by the company in the General Meeting of its shareholders. As per Section CNR : WBCHCO0011762020 | Date of registration : 21-09-2020 | Decision Date : 14-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : DISPOSED Court : Calcutta High Court
80	OCO/27/2020 of SHREYAS MEDICAL SOCIETY Vs ARVIND KUMAR NEWAR AND ORS. Judge : THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON’BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations. It is further submitted that as per Section 152(2) of the Companies Act, 2013, directors are appointed by the company in the General Meeting of its shareholders. As per Section CNR : WBCHCO0017792020 | Date of registration : 07-12-2020 | Decision Date : 14-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : DISPOSED Court : Calcutta High Court
81	OCO/12/2020 of BIRLA CABLE LIMITED Vs ARVIND KUMAR NEWAR AND ORS. Judge : THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON’BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations. It is further submitted that as per Section 152(2) of the Companies Act, 2013, directors are appointed by the company in the General Meeting of its shareholders. As per Section CNR : WBCHCO0016932020 | Date of registration : 27-11-2020 | Decision Date : 14-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : DISPOSED Court : Calcutta High Court
82	OCO/8/2020 of BIRLA CORPORATION LIMITED Vs ARVIND KUMAR NEWAR AND ORS. Judge : THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON’BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations. It is further submitted that as per Section 152(2) of the Companies Act, 2013, directors are appointed by the company in the General Meeting of its shareholders. As per Section CNR : WBCHCO0016252020 | Date of registration : 18-11-2020 | Decision Date : 14-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : DISPOSED Court : Calcutta High Court
83	OCO/21/2020 of BIRLA CABLE LIMITED Vs ARVIND KUMAR NEWAR AND ORS. Judge : THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON’BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations. It is further submitted that as per Section 152(2) of the Companies Act, 2013, directors are appointed by the company in the General Meeting of its shareholders. As per Section CNR : WBCHCO0017502020 | Date of registration : 03-12-2020 | Decision Date : 14-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : DISPOSED Court : Calcutta High Court
84	OCO/3/2020 of UNIVERSAL CABLES LIMITED Vs ARVIND KUMAR NEWAR AND ORS. Judge : THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON’BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations. It is further submitted that as per Section 152(2) of the Companies Act, 2013, directors are appointed by the company in the General Meeting of its shareholders. As per Section CNR : WBCHCO0016202020 | Date of registration : 18-11-2020 | Decision Date : 14-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : DISPOSED Court : Calcutta High Court
85	APO/89/2020 of UNIVERSAL CABLES LIMITED Vs ARVIND KUMAR NEWAR AND ORS Judge : THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON’BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations. It is further submitted that as per Section 152(2) of the Companies Act, 2013, directors are appointed by the company in the General Meeting of its shareholders. As per Section of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations. It is further submitted that as per Section 152(2) of the Companies Act, 2013, directors are appointed by the company in the General Meeting of its shareholders. As per Section CNR : WBCHCO0011742020 | Date of registration : 21-09-2020 | Decision Date : 14-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : DISPOSED Court : Calcutta High Court
86	OCO/17/2020 of SHREYAS MEDICAL SOCIETY Vs ARVIND KUMAR NEWAR AND ORS. Judge : THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM,HON’BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations. It is further submitted that as per Section 152(2) of the Companies Act, 2013, directors are appointed by the company in the General Meeting of its shareholders. As per Section CNR : WBCHCO0016982020 | Date of registration : 27-11-2020 | Decision Date : 14-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : DISPOSED Court : Calcutta High Court
87	CRLP/12018/2023 of Pavan Kumar Kuchana Vs The State of Telangana Judge : K.SURENDER the case of Enforcement Directorate (ED) is that M/s.Taksheel Solutions Limited (for short “TSL”) Company made various misstatements and failed to disclose information in the offer document. The Securities and Exchange Board of India (for short “SEBI”) inquired and conducted CNR : HBHC010610212023 | Date of registration : 05-12-2023 | Decision Date : 13-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : DISPOSED OF NO COSTS Court : High Court for State of Telangana
88	REVN/563/2019 of MEGA CORPORATION LTD. Vs UNION OF INDIA Judge : HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN against the judgment of the Securities Appellate Tribunal in Appeal No.60 of 2008, dated 15th October 2008. 4. The petitioner has tendered the judgment of the Supreme Court, which is reported in the case of Securities and Exchange Board of India Vs. Mega Corporation Ltd. 2022 CNR : HCBM010506932019 | Date of registration : 26-11-2019 | Decision Date : 11-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : Disposed Off Court : Bombay High Court
89	CRL.M.C./4418/2023 of SUBHASH NAGPAL Vs SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Judge : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNISH BHATNAGAR 4418/2023 & CRL.M.A. 16891/2023 SUBHASH NAGPAL ….. Petitioner Through: Mr. Abhik Kumar and Mr Deepak Girdhar, Advocates. versus Securities and Exchange Board of India ….. Respondent Through: Mr. Ashish Aggarwal and Mr. Ankit Dubey, Advocates. CNR : DLHC010245082023 | Date of registration : 01-07-2023 | Decision Date : 11-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : Court : High Court of Delhi
90	CRR/2950/2021 of MOHIT Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH facts available on record. The firm of the applicant is registered in Securities and Exchange Board of India Act (in short ‘SEBI’). SEBI has not taken any action against the applicant. Applicant’s Company merely provides advise to its clients and the Company does not take deposit from its is void ab initio. Further, there is a violation of Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 as no Court shall take 2 cognizance of any offence under this Act or rules or regulations made thereunder, save a complaint made by the Board, but Board has not lodged any complaint. There CNR : MPHC020338892021 | Date of registration : 12-11-2021 | Decision Date : 07-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : Partly Allowed Court : High Court of Madhya Pradesh
91	CRLP/11515/2023 of Kishore Kumar Tapadia Vs The State of Telangana Judge : K.SURENDER Enforcement Directorate (ED) is that M/s.Taksheel Solutions Limited (for short “TSL”) Company made various mis-statements and failed to disclose information in the offer document. The Securities and Exchange Board of India (for short “SEBI”) inquired and conducted preliminary CNR : HBHC010588462023 | Date of registration : 20-11-2023 | Decision Date : 05-12-2023 | Disposal Nature : ALLOWED NO COSTS Court : High Court for State of Telangana
92	ITA/405/2022 of THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX – INTERNATIONAL TAXATION -1 Vs AUGUSTUS CAPITAL PTE. LTD. Judge : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER, portfolio investor under the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Foreign Portfolio Investors) Regulations, 2014, made under the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 (15 of 1992).]‖ 16. Explanations 4 and 5 presented difficulties in that the expressions “share and CNR : DLHC010436752021 | Date of registration : 14-10-2022 | Decision Date : 30-11-2023 | Disposal Nature : Court : High Court of Delhi
93	W.P.(C)/6904/2020 of CITIUS REAL ESTATE PVT LTD Vs UNION OF INDIA AND ANR Judge : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU, Industries Ltd. v. Union of India: (1997) 5 SCC 537 9 (2015)16 SCC 31 W.P.(C) No.6904/2020 Page 23 of 39 them over to the Committee constituted by the Supreme Court in the case of Securities and Exchange Board of India v. Golden Forests India Limited.10 referred to as CNR : DLHC017971592020 | Date of registration : 23-09-2020 | Decision Date : 23-11-2023 | Disposal Nature : Court : High Court of Delhi
94	W.P.(C)/6904/2020 of CITIUS REAL ESTATE PVT LTD Vs UNION OF INDIA AND ANR Judge : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU, Industries Ltd. v. Union of India: (1997) 5 SCC 537 9 (2015)16 SCC 31 W.P.(C) No.6904/2020 Page 23 of 39 them over to the Committee constituted by the Supreme Court in the case of Securities and Exchange Board of India v. Golden Forests India Limited.10 referred to as CNR : DLHC010259082020 | Date of registration : 23-09-2020 | Decision Date : 23-11-2023 | Disposal Nature : Court : High Court of Delhi
95	W.P.(C)/10786/2019 of RAMESH CHANDRA KALRA Vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Judge : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU, within a period of six months thereafter. 23. In the case of Committee- GFIL v. Libra Buildtech Private Limited & Ors.4 the stamp papers were purchased by the applicants on 02.09.2011 and the same were handed over to the Committee constituted by the Supreme Court in Securities and Exchange Board of India CNR : DLHC019272452019 | Date of registration : 09-10-2019 | Decision Date : 22-11-2023 | Disposal Nature : Court : High Court of Delhi
96	W.P.(C)/10786/2019 of RAMESH CHANDRA KALRA Vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Judge : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU, within a period of six months thereafter. 23. In the case of Committee- GFIL v. Libra Buildtech Private Limited & Ors.4 the stamp papers were purchased by the applicants on 02.09.2011 and the same were handed over to the Committee constituted by the Supreme Court in Securities and Exchange Board of India CNR : DLHC010405002019 | Date of registration : 09-10-2019 | Decision Date : 22-11-2023 | Disposal Nature : Court : High Court of Delhi
97	CW/4045/2017 of M/S E M C I P I INFRASTRUCTURE Vs URBAN DEVELOPMENT AND HOUSING DEPT ORS Judge : GANESH RAM MEENA of T. Takano Vs. Securities and Exchange Board of India & Anr., (Civil Appeal Nos. 487-488 of 2022) decided on February 18, 2022, has observed in para 51 as under:- “51. The conclusions are summarised below: (i) The appellant has a right to disclosure of CNR : RJHC020651712017 | Date of registration : 18-03-2017 | Decision Date : 22-11-2023 | Disposal Nature : DISPOSED OF Court : High Court Of Rajasthan
98	W.P.(C)/8696/2022 of POOJA MENGHANI Vs INSOLVENCY AND BANKRUPTCY BOARD OF INDIA & ANR. Judge : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD thereby violated Regulation 3 (a), 3 (b), 3 (c), 3 (d) and 4(1) of the 2003 Regulations. b) Resultantly, a penalty of Rs.1 Crore was imposed on the Petitioner by the adjudicating officer under Section 15HA of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 (hereinafter referred to CNR : DLHC010216052022 | Date of registration : 30-05-2022 | Decision Date : 20-11-2023 | Disposal Nature : Court : High Court of Delhi
99	WP(MD)/14535/2016 of GOKULA KANNAN Vs THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE Judge : Honourable Mr Justice B.PUGALENDHI of 2016 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 10.11.2023 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI WP(MD)No.14535 of 2016 1.Gokula Kannan 2.M.Nitheesh Kannan .. Petitioners vs. 1.The Securities and Exchange Board of India , any other Forum shall pass any orders against the orders passed by the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) in implementation of this Court’s judgment dated 31.08.2012”. 7. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and the order passed by the Hon’ble CNR : HCMD011007882016 | Date of registration : 09-08-2016 | Decision Date : 10-11-2023 | Disposal Nature : DISMISSED Court : Madras High Court
100	CO.A(SB)/9/2015 of M/S PHENIL SUGARS LTD. Vs MRS. LAXMI GUPTA & ORS. Judge : HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH thereafter terminated his association with the Appellant and made several complaints to the Registrar of Companies, Company Law Board, Securities and Exchange Board of India and various other authorities against the Appellant. 13. It is averred by the Appellant that Respondent No. 4 then formed company to register the transfer of shares. (3) The Tribunal may, on an application made by a depository, company, participant or investor or the Securities and Exchange Board of India , if the transfer of shares or debentures is in contravention of any of the provisions of the Securities and Exchange Board of India CNR : DLHC010472012015 | Date of registration : 11-03-2015 | Decision Date : 10-11-2023 | Disposal Nature : Court : High Court of Delhi

Landmark Judgments on SEBI By Supreme Court of India and High Courts