Skip to main content

Wilful defaulters to face curbs on fund mop-up from capital market

To sternly deal with wilful defaulters, Sebi today decided to impose restrictions on such entities with respect to raising funds from capital markets.

Such measures are expected to further enhance the protection of investors in the securities market.

As part of new norms, the watchdog will impose restrictions on companies, promoters, and directors that are categorised as a 'wilful defaulter' from accessing the capital markets.

"The Board approved the proposal to review the policy in respect of restricting an issuer company/its promoter/ directors, categorized as wilful defaulter, from raising capital after going through the public consultation process," Sebi said in statement after the board meeting.

At present, Sebi norms bar wilful defaulters from issuing convertible debt instruments. However, there is no restriction on such entities from raising funds from the capital market by way of public or rights issues, among others

Before finalising stricter regulations to deal with wilful defaulters, Sebi is expected to gather views from various stakeholders. The matter would also be discussed in the Primary Market Advisory Committee (PMAC).

The approval comes at a time when the amount of bad loans is on the rise in the banking system, mainly due to higher number of wilful defaulters.

To tighten the regulatory noose around wilful defaulters, the Reserve Bank has suggested to Sebi that such entities should be prevented from raising funds through capital markets.

Meanwhile, the government is planning to come out with a separate Bill in Parliament to deal with instances of wilful defaults in payment of bank loans.

Stringent action against the wilful defaulters in terms of attachment of properties under Sarfaesi Act (Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act), change in management and other legal action against the promoters, among others, are under consideration.

 Article referred: http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2014-11-19/news/56265873_1_wilful-defaulters-regulatory-noose-sarfaesi-act

Comments

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

The recovery of vehicles by the financier not an offence - SC

Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 8907  of 2009 Anup Sarmah (Petitioner) Vs Bhola Nath Sharma & Ors.(Respondents) The petitioner submitted that  respondents-financer had forcibly taken away the vehicle financed by them and  illegally deprived the petitioner from its lawful possession  and  thus,  committed  a crime. The complaint filed by the petitioner had been  entertained  by  the Judicial Magistrate (Ist Class), Gauhati (Assam) in Complaint Case  No.  608 of 2009, even directing the interim custody of the vehicle (Maruti  Zen)  be given to the petitioner vide order dated  17.3.2009.  The respondent on approaching the Guwahati High  Court against this order, the hon'ble court squashed the criminal  proceedings  pending   before  the  learned Magistrate. After hearing both sides, the Hon'ble Supreme Court decided on 30th...
7 comments
Read more

Flat owner without legal title has consumer rights

In a significant judgment, the South Mumbai Consumer Forum has held that a flat owner legally occupying the flat would be a consumer, even if his title to the flat might be in dispute before a competent court. Thurlow owned a flat in a co-operative society. Appuswami was residing with him. In 1976, Appuswami got married in the same flat, and his wife started residing in the same flat. They had three children, born and brought up in the same flat. After Thurlow expired in 2004, Appuswami approached the High Court for inheritance to Thurlow's estate but expired while the matter was pending. His wife and children were brought on record. Subsequently, the society intervened, contending Appuswami did not have any right to the flat and it should be handed over to the Society. The Appuswami family continued to reside in the flat, and even pay the society's outgoings and maintenance charges. Later, the society stopped collecting maintenance charges from all members, as it earned...
Post a Comment
Read more

Court approached in the early stages of arbitration will prevail in all other subsequent proceedings

In National Highway Authority of India v. Hindustan Steelworks Construction Limited, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court opined that once the parties have approached a certain court for relief under Act at earlier stages of disputes then it is same court that, parties must return to for all other subsequent proceedings. Language of Section 42 of Act is categorical and brooks no exception. In fact, the language used has the effect of jurisdiction of all courts since it states that once an application has been made in Part I of the Act then ―that Court alone shall have jurisdiction over arbitral proceedings and all subsequent applications arising out of that agreement and arbitral proceedings shall be made in that Court and in no other Court. Court holds that NHAI in present case cannot take advantage of Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for explaining inordinate delay in filing present petition under Section 34 of this Act in this Court.
Post a Comment
Read more