 |
| Sahara Group |
The Supreme Court was consideration Sahara Group's petition contrary to the tips of the Allahabad High Court, which directed the company to share with marketplace controller Sebi the details of investors participating in the scheme.
A three-judge bench, headed by Chief Justice SH Kapadia, besides told Sahara India Real Estate with the aim of it will maintain to explain the belief of the Optionally Fully Convertible Debentures (OFCD) scheme.
"The petitioners (Sahara) are directed to furnish to us the proforma in which the investors maintain practical in place of OFCD. They will besides allot us a file of accredited agents from whom these units maintain been bought," thought the bench.
The direction follows Sahara's submission with the aim of it was the duty of Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi) verify the addresses of the investors in the OFCD scheme.
Two entities of Sahara Group -- Sahara India Real Estate Corporation and Sahara Housing Investment Corporation -- were raising money from investors through OFCDs.
Senior advocate Soli Sorabjee, appearing in place of the Sahara set, submitted near were around 67 lakh investors and lots of dispatch were not near in the forms.
To with the aim of, the bench thought, "Show us folks applications, by the side of smallest amount selected of them. We are asking in place of the format... Whether these forms were prescribed by the Sebi or not."
However, Sebi informed the bench with the aim of Sahara's statement has thought, "investors ought to not be contacted by the Sebi".
Sorabjee thought Sahara has already certain two CDs, along with passwords, only if details of the investors. He besides raised circulation whether Sebi has jurisdiction on OFCD schemes.
Senior advocates Altaf Ahmed and P Venugopal, representing Sebi, thought with the aim of the in turn provided by Sahara was not sufficient.
On May 2, the high point square had adjourned the carry some weight in place of a week similar to the group's investment arm, Sahara India Real Estate Corporation, sought schedule to box file papers.
The High Court had dismissed Sahara's statement to vacate its earlier order, which permitted Sebi to amass in turn on two of its OFCD schemes.
On April 29, the square thought the set had not complied with its order to provide the requisite in turn in place of Sebi.