Sebi slaps Rs 40 lakh fine on 6 cos in investor complaint case

Eider Infotech tops list with a fine of Rs 30 lakh; regulator disposes cases against seven other firms

Market regulator Sebi has slapped a total fine of around Rs 40 lakh on six companies for allegedly failing to obtain registration with its online complaint system as well as not resolving pending investor grievances.

Besides, Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi) disposed of cases against seven firms in investor complaint cases.

The capital market watchdog has imposed a penalty of Rs 30 lakh on Eider Infotech, Rs 4 lakh on Apex Interteck, Rs 1.5 lakh each on Vijay Remedies, Mahavira Foods and Apex Interteck and Rs 1 lakh on Spicebulls Investments (formerly known as Twenty First Century Capitals).

According to Sebi, Eider Infotech, Apex Interteck, Vijay Remedies, Mahavira Foods and Apex Interteck failed to obtain SCORES authentication.

Besides, these firms have not resolved investor grievances pending against them.

While, Spicebulls Investments made a delay in complying with these norms.

Accordingly, the capital markets regulator has levied fines on these companies.

In 2012, Sebi had directed all listed companies to get SCORES authentication by September 14 of the same year, failing which they would have to face enforcement action.

SCORES, launched by Sebi in June 2011, provides a centralised database of all complaints.

Online movement of complaints to the concerned listed companies and upload of ATRs by the concerned companies are done through this system.

It also helps investors view, track and follow up the actions taken on their grievances. The online redressal system has significantly helped in reducing the processing time of complaints.

Also, the regulator has disposed of investor complaint cases against seven firms - Ajay Electrical Industries, Cyber Space, Hallmark Drugs & Chemicals, Shivam Autotech, Oscar Investments, James Hotels and Hartron Communications.

Sebi has disposed of cases against these seven companies as the allegation of not resolving the investor grievance could not be established against them.