Sahara India

Since: Feb 13

France

#1 Feb 13, 2013
As per Sahara, the total liability is not likely to exceed Rs. 5120 Crores and this amount has already been deposited with SEBI. With regard to the installments to be deposited with SEBI as per the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, Sahara has filed Interim Application before the Hon’ble Supreme Court pleading that Sahara be permitted to furnish security through a credible financial institution in place of the payment of the balance installments, since Sahara has already redeemed significant number of OFCD Holders. Thus any further payments to SEBI would amount to double payment. The said Interim Application is pending and is likely to come up next week.

Further, today’s order of SEBI for attachment of the assets is based on old facts and details of assets as of January, 2012. Since, then facts have changed in view of redemptions made by Sahara from time to time. This fact of redemption was known to SEBI. Hence, today’s order does not take into account the changed facts and circumstances.

As per the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the liability to refund the money is of SIRECL and SHICL. Hence, attachment, of assets of the individuals by SEBI is incorrect. Whereas not only company has paid to SEBI enough amount which is much higher than outstanding liabilities of two companies, the fact also remains in the whole affair that Sahara is genuinely concerned about investors. There are number of companies in India including Golden Forest Company where after Hon’ble Supreme Court’s order to repay and the committee appointed (whose chairman was retired Chief justice of Delhi High Court) to repay was paid. But from 2004 till now, not a single investor has got back one rupee.

Since: Dec 12

France

#2 Feb 14, 2013
I don’t think the freezing is done for right coz the actions taken by Sebi are based on "old facts" and the orders for attaching assets of individuals are incorrect on part of the market regulator.

Since: Dec 12

France

#3 Feb 14, 2013
Also the liability to refund the money is of SIRECL and SHICL and therefore "attachment of assets of the individuals” by Sebi is incorrect.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 2 min Buck Crick 63,262
Poll Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 5 min Annaleigh 106,463
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 5 min andet1987 973,535
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 15 min Brian_G 281,811
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 15 min kent 653,575
Encourage Teenage Girls To Have Sex (Oct '11) 1 hr lucky 29
News Who is an atheist? (May '10) 1 hr thetruth 9,360
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 2 hr Steve III 618,740
More from around the web