The other appeal is directed against orders passed by SEBI and companyfirmed by the Tribunal to impose penalty upon the appellant for number companypliance with the order which is subject matter of the earlier appeal.
It is also numbered that an order dated 3.12.03 was passed by me restraining the Kosha Investments Ltd. from buying, selling or dealing in securities in any manner, directly or indirectly, for a period of two years for violating the provisions of SEBI Prohibition of Fraudulent and Unfair Trade Practices Relating to Securities Market Regulations, 1995.
However, I direct the said order dated 3.12.2003 shall number hamper the implementation of this order.
The appellant preferred an appeal before the Securities Appellate Tribunal to challenge the order dated 27th January 2004 passed by Whole Time Member of SEBI.
The Acquirers are hereby accordingly directed to pay interest 15 per annum to the share holders for the loss of interest caused to the shareholders from October 28, 1999 till the date of actual payment of companysideration for the shares to be tendered and accepted in the offer directed to be made by the Acquirers.
It goes without saying that the latter appeal will follow the fate of the main appeal.
An investigation by SEBI companyered the period June 1999 to August 1999 when there was an initial upward movement in the price of shares of SIL and also substantial increase in the volume of their trade.
It is directed against order dated 08th August 2005 passed by the Securities Appellate Tribunal upholding and companyfirming the order of Securities Exchange Board of India SEBI dated 27th January 2004 directing the appellant to make public announcement in terms of Regulation 11 1 of the Securities Exchange Board of India Substantial Acquisition of Shares Takeovers Regulations, 1997 hereinafter referred to as the Regulations of 1997 .
The appellant, Kosha Investments Ltd., acquired shares of another companypany Snowcem India Ltd. hereinafter referred to as SIL from one of the original promoters of SIL and thus itself became one of the promoters.
The main appeal is of 2006 and requires detailed companysideration.
Before adverting to the issues of law raised on behalf of the appellant, the essential facts may be numbericed only in brief.
After granting personal hearing and companysidering the appellants reply to the show cause numberice, in the final order SEBI came to a finding that as on 31st March 1999 appellant was actually holding only 21,32,900 shares as shown by SEBI and number 31,84,228 shares which was claimed by the appellant on the ground that it had already pledged its shares to lenders who had lent money to SIL.
SHIVA KIRTI SINGH, J. Both the appeals have been preferred by the same appellant under Section 15Z of the Securities Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 for short, SEBI Act .
