Meenakshi Enterprises Limited v. BSE Limited

1. Both petitions impugn the order dated 18^^ December, 2015 and 2V^ December, 2015 of the respondent No.l BSELimited suspending the trading by the petitioners in securities. fV.P.(C) 715/2016 & W.P.(C) 716/2016 Page 1 of[4] 2016:DHC:9278

2. Counsel for the petitioner in both petition states that the subject petitions are identical to W.P.(C) No.12332/2015 titled as Mahadushi International Trade Limited Vs. BSE Limited and W.P.(C) No.226/2016 titled as Siddharth Businesses Ltd. Vs. BSE Ltd. disposed of vide order dated 15^^ January, 2016 and seeks the same order.

3. It is also the contention of the counsel for the petitioner that in spite ofthe petitioners having supplied all the requisite documents to respondent No. 1 on 14^^ January, 2015 and 29* December, 2015 respectively, no orders have been passed by the respondent No.l BSE for revoking suspension oftrading insecurities bypetitioners.

4. Per contra, the counsel for respondent No.l BSE appearing on advance notice, on instructions, states that (a) the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.715/2016 has submitted only partial documents and the matter can be examined only after receipt of all the documents; it is stated that no supporting documents with respect to the bank statement supplied have been given to show that the money raised W.P.(C) 715/2016 & W.P.(C) 716/2016 Page 2 of[4] from the preferential issues has not been transferred back to the preferential allottees/promoters/directors directly or indirectly; it is further stated that the resolution ofthe board of directors proposing preferential issues for both allotments, resolution ofthe shareholders for both allotments and bank statement showing utilization offunds has not been supplied for the first preferential issue and the funds raised from the preferential allottees and utilization offunds has not been explained in the bank statement for the second preferential issue;(b)the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.716/2016 has also submitted partial documents and has not submitted supporting documents and how the funds raised from preferential allottees have been utilized; it is stated that the resolution ofthe board of directors for allotment of preferential shares and the utilisation offunds raised from preferential allottees has not been explained.

5. Though the counsel for the petitioners states that all the said documents also have been given but it is deemed appropriate to grant time till 1600 hours on 3'^'^ February,2016to the petitioners to submit further documents, if any, including the documents mentioned as W.P.(C) 715/2016& W.P.(C) 716/2016 Page3of[4] aforesaid.

6. Thepetitions aredisposed ofwith the following directions:

(i) Petitioners/their representatives to appear before the concerned official ofthe respondent No. 1/Exchange on 5^*^ February, 2016 at 1100 hours for personal hearing.

(ii) The respondent No.l BSE to, on or before 12^^^ February, 2016, if satisfied, recall the order dated 21'^ December, 2015 or suspension of trading in security of petitioner/s and if not satisfied to pass areasoned order thereon and furnish a copy to the petitioners.

7. As far as the other directions claimed in the petitions are th concerned, the same have already been issued in the order dated 15 January, 2016 and thus need toreiterate thesame does notarise. Copy of the order be given dasti under the signature of Court Master.

JANUARY 27, 2016 mr.. }V.P.(C) 715/2016 & W.P.(C) 716/2016 RAJIV SAHAIENDLAW, J. Page 4 of[4]