9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (12) TMI 1208 - SC - SEBIWinding up proceedings of Mutual fund scheme - objections to the e-voting results - HELD THAT - Permission to file special leave petitions is granted Issue notice.Counter affidavit/reply be filed by the non-applicants/respondents within seven days. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, be filed within seven days thereafter. Service upon the unrepresented respondents is permitted through all modes including e-mails. An apprehension is expressed on behalf of the SEBI that the last order recording that without prejudice to the rights and contentions of all parties, the trustees are permitted to call meeting of unit holders to seek their consent/approval could be misread and treated as a precedent. This it is stated would create difficulties. We clarify that order 2020 (12) TMI 1209 - SUPREME COURT has been passed in the peculiar facts and circumstances ofthe case and to expedite the hearing and decision in the present special leave petitions. The same should not be treated as a precedent in any other matter. SEBI shall appoint an observer regarding the e-voting of unit holders which is scheduled between 26 th December to 29th December, 2020. The result of the e-voting would not be announced and would be produced before us in a sealed cover along with the report of the observer appointed by the SEBI. SEBI would also file a copy of the final Forensic Audit Report before this Court in a sealed cover. It is made clear that the trustees are undertaking the exercise of e-voting and SEBI in terms of our directions is appointing an observer.
Issues:
1. Direction for issue of notice in S.L.P.(Civil)Nos.14288-14291/2020. 2. Special leave petitions by SEBI and issuance of notice in other related cases. 3. Clarification on the order dated 3rd December, 2020 not being a precedent. 4. Appointment of an observer for e-voting of unit holders. 5. Treatment of S.L.P.(Civil)Nos.14288-14291/2020 as a lead case. 6. Continuation of interim order staying redemption payment to unit holders. 7. Listing of petitions for hearing in the 3rd week of January, 2021. Detailed Analysis: 1. The Supreme Court clarified that the order dated 3rd December, 2020, which did not specifically record the direction for the issue of notice in S.L.P.(Civil)Nos.14288-14291/2020, should be read as an order issuing notice in these petitions. This clarification was made to ensure procedural correctness and proper notice in the mentioned cases. 2. The Court granted permission to file special leave petitions and directed the issuance of notice in S.L.P.(Civil)Nos.14734/2020, 14929/2020, 15008/2020, and S.L.P.(Civil)Diary Nos.26325/2020 and 26728/2020. It also instructed the filing of counter affidavits/replies by respondents within seven days and allowed service on unrepresented respondents through various modes, including e-mails. 3. Emphasizing that the order of 3rd December, 2020, was specific to the circumstances of the case and not to be considered a precedent, the Court addressed concerns raised by SEBI regarding potential misinterpretation of the order. It clarified that the order was issued to expedite the hearing and decision in the special leave petitions at hand. 4. SEBI was directed to appoint an observer for the e-voting of unit holders scheduled between 26th December to 29th December, 2020. The results of the e-voting were to be presented in a sealed cover along with the observer's report and the final Forensic Audit Report before the Court. The trustees were tasked with conducting the e-voting, while SEBI was responsible for appointing the observer. 5. S.L.P.(Civil)Nos.14288-14291/2020 was designated as a lead case, with counsels instructed to collaborate and submit a common compilation. An interim order from 3rd December, 2020, staying redemption payments to unit holders, was to remain in effect until the next hearing scheduled for the 3rd week of January, 2021. 6. The Court listed the petitions for a comprehensive hearing in January 2021, signifying the importance and complexity of the legal issues involved in the case. This scheduling decision aimed to ensure thorough consideration and resolution of the matters at hand.
|
