The regulator had alleged violation of provisions under the Sebi listing regulations and the Securities Contracts Regulation Act.
Sebi had issued a show-cause notice to the two applicants on November 22, 2023. The notice asked why inquiry should not be held and why penalty, if any, should not be imposed for the alleged violations.
The authorised representatives of the applicants, Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas, submitted replies to the show-cause notice on January 16, 2024. They later informed Sebi that settlement applications had been filed under the Sebi Settlement Proceedings Regulations, 2018.
A settlement mechanism allows entities to resolve regulatory proceedings by paying a settlement amount, without admission or denial of findings, subject to approval under the applicable settlement rules.
Sebi’s internal committee held meetings with the applicants’ representatives on May 8, 2024, and July 15, 2024, where the settlement terms were discussed. The internal committee recommended a settlement amount of Rs 13.65 lakh for each applicant. The applicants then filed revised settlement terms on July 19, 2024, agreeing to pay the amount recommended by the committee.
The High Powered Advisory Committee, in its meeting held on June 29, 2026, recommended that the case be settled on payment of Rs 13.65 lakh by each applicant. The recommendation was approved by a panel of Sebi whole-time members on August 13, 2026.Sebi communicated the approval to the applicants’ representatives on August 14. The representatives later informed Sebi on September 5 that the settlement amount had been remitted. The order said the material on record confirmed receipt of the amount by Sebi.
After accepting the settlement terms and receiving the money, Sebi disposed of the adjudication proceedings initiated through the show-cause notice.
However, Sebi said the settlement order is without prejudice to its right to take action under Regulation 28 of the Settlement Regulations. This includes restoring or initiating proceedings if any representation made by the applicants is later found to be untrue, if undertakings or waivers are breached, or if there is any discrepancy in arriving at the settlement terms.
(Disclaimer: Recommendations, suggestions, views and opinions given by the experts are their own. These do not represent the views of Economic Times)
