Cracking the whip on illegal investment schemes in the guise of plant cultivation and animal rearing, Sebi today directed Anmol India Agro-Herbal Farming & Dairies Care Company and its directors to repay money to investors within a maximum two months.
The company was found to be running 'collective investment schemes (CIS)' without obtaining registration from the regulator. It was inviting investments from the general public through its 'development and maintenance/rearing of the farms/animals/plants' scheme.
The latest order comes after the Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT) on August 29 had directed the firm to file a representation before the Sebi within four weeks where the details of money paid as well as mode of return along with balance amount should be stated. Further, the regulator was directed to dispose of the case within eight weeks thereafter.
Following this, Sebi, in an order passed today, has asked Anmol India and its directors -- Mohammad Khalid Memon, Mohammad Junaid Memon, Mohammad Javed Memon and Mohammad Umar Memon -- to repay the amount within a maximum period of two months, failing which other enforcement actions will follow.
Earlier in May 2016, the regulator had asked Anmol India to refund the investors' money, along with returns, within three months.
At that point, Anmol India had admitted to have mobilised more than Rs 141 crore and claimed to have refunded a little over Rs 103 crore.
Further, in its latest representation to Sebi in September this year, the company stated that the amount to be refunded stood at Rs 38.32 crore. Besides, it sought 12 months from Sebi to refund the money by selling its agricultural as well as non-agricultural land or by transferring its immovable properties of adequate value to customers.
"I note that though the final order allowed Anmol India to sell its immovable properties for the purpose of refund, it has now made the representation as if no such permission existed. I note that Anmol India is just engaging itself in correspondence with Sebi with the idea of delaying and protracting compliance with the final order.
"This is also to avoid other actions being taken against it for the failure or delay in ensuring compliance with the final order. The proposal does not appear genuine and hence does not merit any consideration," Sebi Whole Time Member G Mahalingam said in an order.
(This story has not been edited by Business Standard staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)