w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n


Futuristics Garments Pvt. Ltd. v/s Securities and Exchange Board of India

    Appeal No.152 of 2008
    Decided On, 05 January 2009
    At, SEBI Securities Exchange Board of India Securities Appellate Tribunal
    By, CORAM : JUSTICE N.K. SODHI
    By, PRESIDING OFFICER
    By, UTPAL BHATTACHARYA
    By, MEMBER
    Mr. S. P. Sharma Advocate for the Appellant. Mr. Kumar Desai with Ms. Daya Gupta Advocate for the Respondent.


Judgment Text
Justice N.K. Sodhi, Presiding Officer (Oral)


Challenge in this appeal is to the order dated 24.9.2008 passed by the whole time member of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (for short the Board) declining the request of the appellant to exempt the acquisition from Regulations 10, 11 and 12 of the Securities and Exchange board of India (Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations, 1997 (hereinafter called the takeover code). In para 5.8 of the impugned order, the learned whole time member has observed that the target company was free to make the preferential allotment to the acquirer for satisfying the stipulation of IDBI Bank and that the acquirer in that event could seek exemption under Regulation 3(i)(l) of the takeover code. The learned counsel for the appellant contends that M/s. Surya Pharmaceuticals Ltd. ? the target company would make preferential allotment in favour of the appellant which is one of its promoters and that the appellant shall file a fresh application to the Board seeking exemption from the provisions of Regulations 10, 11 and 12 of the takeover code. His apprehensions are that the Board may not decide the application within the time limit prescribed in Regulation 4 of the takeover code and that the increase in the stake of the appellant in the target company is vital for obtaining financial assistance from IDBI Bank. He cites the instance of the previous application culminating in the passing of the impugned order. He states that the Board took more than four months in disposing of that application. The learned counsel further contends that in case the Board and the Takeover panel are directed to adhere to the time limit prescribed in Regulation 4(1) of the takeover code, he would not press this appeal.


2. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, we dispose of this appeal with a direction to the respondent Board that in case the appellant files a complete application seeking exemption under the takeover code, the same shall be he

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!
ard and disposed of in accordance with law within the time limit prescribed by Regulation 4 of the takeover code. The Takeover panel shall also adhere to the time limit prescribed in Regulation 4. There is no order as to costs.
O R