Sahara challenges govt stand on OFCDs issue at SAT

Image
BS Reporter Mumbai
Last Updated : Jan 21 2013 | 12:12 AM IST

Why did the central government register its debenture-issue prospectus and then take well over a year to suddenly say it didn’t agree, asked counsel for the Sahara group of companies at the Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT) today.

Sahara India Real Estate Corporation and Sahara Housing Investment Corporation are contesting an order by the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi) to refund money collected by issuing Optionally Fully Convertible Debentures (OFCDs). In an affidavit filed at SAT last week, the central government supported Sebi’s action.

Saying the stand was “irresponsible”, Sahara counsel Fali S Nariman said the registrar of companies was not just a “record keeper”. It was bound to refuse documents filed by companies if these were not in order. “You can’t come to me after two and a half years and say all my documents are false and illegal,” he said.

SAT also directed the government to spell out what decision it had taken on the matter of jurisdiction when it had asked Sahara for details of the OFCD issue in October 2010, even while a probe by the market regulator was on.

Sahara contended it had not concealed any detail in the prospectus and had made clear its intention not to list the OFCDs. The counsel argued extensively on Section 55A of the Companies Act, which he said limited the powers of Sebi to companies that are listed and those intending to list. The Sahara group companies, having categorically said in their prospectus that they did not intend to list the OFCDs, would not come under Sebi’s jurisdiction, the counsel argued.

However, SAT presiding officer N K Sodhi said Section 55A did not have the effect of curtailing the powers vested on Sebi by Sections 11 and 11A of the Sebi Act.

Nariman will continue his arguments on the section and other important questions of law, including whether the OFCDs are ‘securities’ as defined under the Sebi Act. According to Sahara, the instruments are “hybrids” and do not come under the definition of securities.

Tomorrow, SAT will also hear an application filed by the Mumbai-based Investors and Consumer Guidance Society to make itself a party to the dispute. The investor group’s lawyer said, “The question of law on Section 55 A has a wider implication on the investor community. We will support Sebi.”

*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

More From This Section

First Published: Sep 06 2011 | 12:08 AM IST

Next Story