Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Wednesday, Nov 24, 2004

About Us
Contact Us
Business
News: Front Page | National | Tamil Nadu | Andhra Pradesh | Karnataka | Kerala | New Delhi | Other States | International | Opinion | Business | Sport | Miscellaneous |
Advts:
Classifieds | Employment |

Business Printer Friendly Page   Send this Article to a Friend

Tribunal sets aside SEBI order on JM Mutual Fund

By Our Special Correspondent

MUMBAI, NOV. 23. The Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT) today pointed out the inconsistencies in the orders passed by the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) and asked the capital market regulator to be consistent in its orders in future to avoid the impression of discrimination.

While setting aside an order of SEBI against JM Mutual Fund, Kumar Rajaratnam, Presiding Officer of the Tribunal stated, "Consistency is a hallmark of a good regulator. Pick and choose does not auger well for a healthy market.....We trust and hope that the regulator will be consistent in dealing with these matters in future otherwise it gives the impression of discrimination."

The SEBI had imposed a penalty of Rs. 30 lakhs on JM Capital Management and a further sum of Rs. 20 lakhs on the JM Mutual Fund for their failure to comply with Section 15E (deals with failure to observe rules and regulations by the asset management company) and Sec. 15D (deals with defaults in case of mutual funds) of SEBI Act.

This penalty of Rs. 50 lakhs was imposed on these entities as they failed to make mention of an earlier order of SEBI against JM Financial and Investment Consultancy Services Pvt Ltd, the sponsors of JM Capital Management for violating SEBI Takeover Regulations, in the offer document to launch its mutual fund schemes.

"In circumstances where a person voluntarily comes forward and makes a disclosure stating that such disclosure was not made because of circumstances beyond his control, the SEBI should be little slow in issuing show cause notice without concrete proof that the entity deliberately withheld the information......In the result, we hold that the impugned order passed against the first appellant JM Mutual Fund is set aside. We, however, modify the order passed against the second appellant, JM Capital Management and reduce the penalty from Rs. 30 lakhs to Rs. 5 lakhs," the SAT ordered.

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Business

News: Front Page | National | Tamil Nadu | Andhra Pradesh | Karnataka | Kerala | New Delhi | Other States | International | Opinion | Business | Sport | Miscellaneous |
Advts:
Classifieds | Employment | Updates: Breaking News |


News Update


The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription
Group Sites: The Hindu | Business Line | The Sportstar | Frontline | The Hindu eBooks | Home |

Copyright © 2004, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu