Business Standard

Sunday, December 22, 2024 | 08:03 AM ISTEN Hindi

Notification Icon
userprofile IconSearch

SAT adjourns Zee Entertainment-Sebi matter; next hearing on Tuesday

Refuses to take on record additional affidavit filed by Sebi in the matter

Zee

Zee (Bloomberg)

Khushboo Tiwari Mumbai
The Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT) on Monday declined to take on record an additional affidavit filed by the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi) related to the regulator’s interim order against Essel Group chairman emeritus Subash Chandra and Zee Entertainment Enterprises’ (ZEEL) managing director and chief executive officer and Punit Goenka.

The tribunal will continue hearing the appeal filed against the Sebi order on June 27.

Meanwhile, the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) has adjourned the hearing on ZEEL and Sony Pictures Network India to July 6.

SAT is hearing appeals filed by Chandra and Goenka against Sebi’s interim order issued on June 12, barring them from taking key managerial and director positions at listed companies on account of alleged fund diversion.
 

According to senior advocate Janak Dwarkadas, the counsel representing Goenka, they received the copy of the additional affidavit filed by the markets regulator after midnight and so it should not be taken on record.

Story so far
 

April 2023: Sebi issues interim order in Essel group firm Shirpur, seeks detail on the overlapping entities in both cases

June 12, 2023: Sebi passes interim order against Chandra, Goenka on alleged fund diversion

June 13: ZEEL promoters approach SAT, hearings ongoing in the matter since June 15

Considering the objections, the bench -- led by Justice Tarun Agarwala -- declined to take it on record for the consideration in final orders.

Advocate Somasekhar Sundaresan, representing Chandra, argued that Chandra has not been at the helm of operations of ZEEL since August 2020 and does not hold any key managerial or director position in the company. He added that there was no merit in the urgency of the order issued by Sebi and that the order itself was ‘flawed’ and ‘questionable’.

He added that no proper procedure was followed to arrive at the order at this stage and that it reflected ‘pre-judging’ and ‘bias’.

Citing the Sebi whole-time-member’s involvement in one of the settlement panels in the past, Sundaresan pointed out the lack of separation of powers at Sebi, stating that it was a violation of the regulator’s own principles.

However, senior advocate Darius Khambata, who was representing Sebi, argued that Chandra and Goenka had not submitted any explanation or material to the markets regulator against the allegations in the last two weeks.

Don't miss the most important news and views of the day. Get them on our Telegram channel

First Published: Jun 26 2023 | 7:37 PM IST

Explore News