Home | Back |
ADJUDICATION
ORDER UNDER RULE 5 OF THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA (PROCEDURE FOR
HOLDING INQUIRY AND IMPOSING PENALTIES BY ADJUDICATING OFFICER) RULES, 1995 IN
THE MATTER OF ADJUDICATION PROCEEDINGS AGAINST NOKIA INTERNATIONAL FINANCE
PRIVATE LIMITED FOR FAILURE TO FURNISH INFORMATION AND TO COMPLY WITH THE
SUMMONS ISSUED BY SEBI. 1.
Vide� order dated October 14, 2004 issued by the Securities
and Exchange Board of India (hereinafter referred to as �SEBI�) I was appointed� as the Adjudicating Officer to inquire into
and adjudge under Section 15I� of the
Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 (hereinafter referred to as
the �SEBI Act�), the violation of Section 11C of the SEBI Act alleged to have
been committed by Nokia International Finance Pvt. Ltd (hereinafter referred to
as the noticee) �by not complying with
the summons issued by SEBI seeking information regarding its dealings in the
scrip of Sword & Shield Pharma Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as SSPL).�� It is alleged that SEBI issued summons /
letters number IVD/ID3/PKB/AA/SSPL/15380/2004
dated � NOTICE AND
REPLY 2.
A notice no.
A&E/BS/33253/2005 dated February 9, 2005 was issued to the noticee in terms
of Rule 4 of Securities and Exchange Board of India (Procedure for Holding
Inquiry and Imposing Penalties by Adjudicating Officer) Rules, 1995
(hereinafter referred to as the �Rules�) seeking reply of the noticee as to why
an inquiry should not be held against it in respect of the violations alleged
to have been committed by it. 3.
It is noted that
the noticee did not reply to the show cause notice. As the noticee failed to
reply to the show cause notice, considering the facts and circumstances of the
case it was decided that an inquiry should be held and the noticee was advised
to attend the hearing scheduled on 4.
Shri. Samir
Shah, Director of the noticee company attended the hearing on a ) We have submitted
the information to SEBI in response to the summons. b ) At present we do not have any papers
as we have closed down the business since last three years c) In response to the summons I appeared
before the Investigation Authority on CONSIDERATION
OF EVIDENCE AND FINDINGS 5.
The allegation
against the noticee is that it failed to comply with the summons issued by
SEBI.� It is noted that SEBI issued
summons / letters IVD/ID3/PKB/AA/SSPL/15380/2004 dated 6.
It is pertinent
to note that the facts and circumstances of the case available on record that
in response to the first summons issued by SEBI, the noticee appeared before
the investigating authority and his statement was recorded by the investigating
authority. �Subsequently certain details
were sought by the investigating authority vide�
letter dated 7.
In view of the
above, considering the fact that the noticee had appeared for the investigating
authority in response to the summons number IVD/ID3/PKB/AA/SSPL/15380/2004
dated 8.
In this regard,
the provisions of Section �15A(a) of SEBI
Act provides the following: 15A.
Penalty for failure to furnish information, return, etc. : If any person, who
is required under this Act or any rules or regulations made thereunder,�to
furnish any document, return or report to the Board, fails to furnish the same,
he shall be liable to a penalty of one lakh rupees for each day during which
such failure continues or one crore rupees, whichever is less�. 9.
In this regard,
the provisions of Section 15J of the SEBI Act and Rule 5 of the Rules require
that while adjudging the quantum of penalty, the adjudicating officer shall
have due regard to the following factors namely; a)
the amount of
disproportionate gain or unfair advantage wherever quantifiable, made as a
result of the default b)
the amount of
loss caused to an investor or group of investors as a result of the default c)
the repetitive
nature of the default 10. It is noted that no quantifiable figures are
available to assess the disproportionate gain or unfair advantage made as a result
of the default.� Further, the amount of
loss caused to an investor or group of investors also cannot be quantified on
the basis of the available facts and data.�
In this regard it is pertinent to note that as stated before, the
noticee had appeared before the investigating authority of SEBI in response to
the summons issued by SEBI.� With regard
to the information/ details sought by SEBI vide letter dated ���� ORDER 11. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case,
though it is noted that Nokia International Finance Limited failed to submit
certain information to the investigating authority of SEBI in response to the letter
dated August 23, 2004 issued by SEBI, however taking into account the fact that
Nokia International Finance Limited had earlier appeared before the
investigating authority of SEBI, I am of the view that no penalty needs to be
imposed on Nokia International Finance Limited in terms of the provisions of
the Section 15A(a) of the SEBI Act. 12. In terms of the provisions of Rule 6 of the SEBI
(Procedure for Holding Inquiry and Imposing Penalties by Adjudicating Officer)
Rules 1995, copies of this order are sent to Nokia International Finance
Limited and to SEBI.��� PLACE: MUMBAI��������������������������������������������������� BIJU.
S � |
![]() | Printer Friendly page | ![]() | Email this page |
The site is best viewed in Internet Explorer 11.0+, Firefox 24+ or Chrome 33+.