24.11.2012 Views

Shopper's Stop Limited - Securities and Exchange Board of India

Shopper's Stop Limited - Securities and Exchange Board of India

Shopper's Stop Limited - Securities and Exchange Board of India

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

eminder letters dated 2 nd November 2001, 12 th December 2001, 1 st July 2002 <strong>and</strong> 1 st July<br />

2003 for the same. However, no action was taken by the Stock <strong>Exchange</strong> in the matter.<br />

The company has further received a letter dated 10 th July,2004 Ref No: DCS/DELISTED/<br />

508833/38 from the Stock <strong>Exchange</strong>, Mumbai stating that the company has failed to reply<br />

to the said Show Cause Notice bearing Ref No. DCS/DL/SM/50883/51 dated 11 th<br />

February, 2004 even though the company had already replied to the same on 16/3/2004<br />

as aforesaid.<br />

The company has received a letter dated 21 st July , 2004 no.CFD/DCR/RC/TO/13060/04<br />

from <strong>Securities</strong> <strong>Exchange</strong> <strong>Board</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>India</strong> stating allegation against the company about<br />

violation <strong>of</strong> Regulation 6 <strong>and</strong> 8 <strong>of</strong> SEBI (Substantial Acquisition <strong>of</strong> Shares <strong>and</strong> Takeovers)<br />

Regulations, 1997.The letter further states that SEBI had introduced a Regularisation<br />

Scheme, 2002 for non-compliance <strong>of</strong> Regulation 6 <strong>and</strong> 8 <strong>of</strong> the said Regulations <strong>and</strong> the<br />

company had not availed <strong>of</strong> the scheme <strong>and</strong> therefore the company is liable to pay<br />

penalty under Section 15A <strong>of</strong> the SEBI Act, 1992 <strong>and</strong> prosecution under section 24 <strong>of</strong> the<br />

said Act. The letter further states that pursuant to the provisions <strong>of</strong> Section 15T(2) (b) <strong>of</strong><br />

the SEBI Act, SEBI has now <strong>of</strong>fered to pass a consent order upon payment <strong>of</strong> Rs.<br />

1,75,000/- as penalty by the company for aforesaid alleged violations.<br />

The company has replied to the said letter <strong>of</strong> SEBI vide its letter dated 6 th August, 2004<br />

interalia stating that the application for delisting was made way back in 1998 <strong>and</strong> it is only<br />

in the year 2004 that the shares have been delisted on BSE vide its letter dated 10.7.2004<br />

after regular follow up. In the said letter the company has also contended that the penalty<br />

<strong>of</strong> Rs 175000/- appears to be on the higher side. Nevertheless, the company has paid the<br />

said sum <strong>of</strong> Rs 175000/- vide cheque no. 890817 dated 6.8.2004 drawn on IOB, B<strong>and</strong>ra<br />

<strong>and</strong> has agreed to the passing <strong>of</strong> consent order by the learned Adjudicating Officer <strong>of</strong><br />

SEBI vide its letter dated 6.8.2004 addressed to SEBI. The company has been delisted<br />

by BSE as per the Press Release dated 2 nd August, 2004 <strong>of</strong> BSE.<br />

Subsequently on August 17, 2004, the company has been intimated by SEBI over the<br />

telephone to await passing <strong>of</strong> the consent order <strong>and</strong> then make the payment.<br />

L) Arrears on cumulative preference shares by Promoters <strong>and</strong>/or companies /firms<br />

promoted by the Promoters<br />

There are none disclosed.<br />

M) Pending Litigations <strong>of</strong> companies/firms/ventures with which Promoters were<br />

associated in the past in case their names continue to be associated with the<br />

particular litigations<br />

There are none disclosed.<br />

N) Potential Litigation<br />

K. Raheja Development & Constructions Pvt. Ltd.<br />

Mr. Ravi C. Raheja has been appointed as a Director <strong>of</strong> K. Raheja Development &<br />

Constructions Pvt. Ltd., a promoter group company, at its Annual General Meeting held on<br />

30 th September, 2002 as proposed by the holding company <strong>of</strong> K. Raheja Development &<br />

Constructions Pvt. Ltd. ie. K Raheja Hotels & Estates Pvt Ltd. One <strong>of</strong> the Directors <strong>of</strong> the<br />

company, Mr. G.L. Raheja has vide his letter dated 7 th October,2002 <strong>and</strong> further letters<br />

therafter, alleged that no resolution (or valid resolution) for the appointment <strong>of</strong> Mr. Ravi C.<br />

Raheja as a Director has been passed by the company. The Promoters have disputed<br />

such contention as untenable <strong>and</strong> are however <strong>of</strong> the view that Mr. Ravi C. Raheja's<br />

appointment as a Director is in accordance with the resolution passed by the shareholders<br />

<strong>of</strong> K. Raheja Development & Constructions Pvt. Ltd <strong>and</strong> in compliance with the<br />

provisions <strong>of</strong> the Companies Act, 1956. Further the necessary form in respect <strong>of</strong> his<br />

appointment has been filed with the Registrar <strong>of</strong> Companies. K. Raheja Development &<br />

Constructions Pvt. Ltd. has replied to Mr G. L. Raheja to this effect from time to time.<br />

VI Litigation pending by <strong>and</strong> or Against Mumbai Undivided Entities<br />

As on the date <strong>of</strong> this draft Red Herring Prospectus, there are family disputes between<br />

some <strong>of</strong> our Promoters <strong>and</strong> the G. L. Raheja family as a result <strong>of</strong> which there could arise,<br />

from time to time, claims <strong>and</strong> counterclaims, between some <strong>of</strong> our Promoters <strong>and</strong> the G.<br />

L. Raheja family. Some <strong>of</strong> these claims <strong>and</strong> counterclaims may have an impact on our<br />

Promoters. Our Promoters believe that such claims <strong>and</strong> counterclaims may not have a<br />

material impact on our Company except for the dispute relating to the premises from<br />

296

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!