Top-up
BS
Capital adequacy and tighter regulation are just one step forward
Sebi to recover Rs 3,000 cr from five Satyam execs.
Looking from an altogether different perspective, as commented
elsewhere:
This is a report seemingly carrying an unhidden fact of life : In the
absence of any foolproof 'mechanism' in place, -which, of course, in the
nature of things, will remain as ever before and is bound to remain a
pipe-dream, so also a non-starter , - for any such scam to come to light
on its own and in due course, everyone concerned would have had to wait
, no knowing for how long; but for the 'honest' realization and
admittance by the culprit himself, voluntarily, of his
misdeed/misadventure of this kind.
In individual's perspective, to fit into the context, it is anybody's
guess how the drastic changes, being made from to time, in the very form
and substance of independent 'statutory audit report', for, besides the
rest, the corporate , including the last in line , unwittingly or
otherwise so, could even remotely be of any help out; but , instead, may
only lead to further complicating and worsening the extant scenario.
Over to the eminent experts, if so willing, for a serious but unbiased /
impartial deliberation and honest opinion.
"....Sebi has asked Raju and others to disgorge within 45 days the
wrongful gains of Rs 1,850 crore, with a simple interest of 12 per cent a
year since January 2009."
On a loud thinking: Granting that the wrongful gains of ..required to
disgorge,have been technically and scientifically worked out, do not, logically
and morally, the impacted investors at whose cost the gains are
assumed/stated to have been made, if not totally, need to be compensated
there out !
This sporadic reaction pivoted on principles of natural justice, though
likely to be intriguing, might be worthwhile due consideration as of
general relevance and application in all such instances in which the
stakeholders' rights and interests happen to have been set at naught/
jeopardized.
Legal pundits backed by their eminence will surely have something to
say, for or otherwise!
BL
July 4
www.thehindubusinessline.com/markets/...sebi/article6174277.ece?...
7 hours ago - Capital market regulator SEBI may have to settle for reduced authority following protests against it being given search and ... Lessons for SEBI
As has been often criticized in knowledgeable circles, there have been instances in the past, within living memory, in which the SEBI, has , unwittingly or otherwise, out strtched /over stepped its assigned powers as a mere regulatory authority by choosing to follow patently misconceived ideas of its own, recklessly, thereby exceeding its brief. One of the irritants has been its sporadic resort to rules- /- decision making, without much of a home work as warranted in the wholesome interests of the national economy.
There is no gainsaying that the utmost need, nay opportune time, for monitoring and regulating the functions of SEBI, so also of the other like regulatory or semi regulatory authorities, has come to surface in a big way.
ICL
Delisting >
Moreover,
the skyrocketing costs as well as management attention required ensuring
compliance with increasingly onerous securities laws and regulations as well as
listing standards compel managements and controlling shareholders to delist the
company so as to enable greater focus on the company’s business.
It is in this context that SEBI earlier this month issued a Discussion Paper on Review of Delisting Regulations. The
Discussion Paper seeks to review the current state of affairs, identify the
deficiencies in the delisting regime and propose some suggestions for overhaul.
It observes:
Prev.
Regulatory Domain over M&A for NBFCs
It is noted that, issuance of such notification by way of extending
'regulatory regime', either by RBI or SEBI, has been frighteningly
assuming almost the 'force of habit'.
The norms laid down are, of
course, claimed to have an ideal aim namely,"...the M&A is not
prejudicial to public interest or the interest of depositors." In a
manner of viewing, the once- upon- a -time (in the hoary past)
vociferously decried and stoutly resisted 'license raj' has, in recent
times, staged a forceful come-back. No knowing how far or to what extent
all such measures, rightly or wrongly thrust upon, are going to fly in
the face of or meekly yield to the near dramatic changes lately
announced in further liberalizing the governmental attitude towards FDIs
and FIIs.
Further, if one were to bear in mind the common bitter
experience even in the recent past, the pastime of churning out more and
more such fashionable rules, with no let up, but without a matching
effective monitory mechanism, mostly entail adverse consequences to the
national economy; but without anywhere meeting or remotely succeeding in
the stated aim.
Over to 'experts' for true and fruitful enlightenment.
SG
You can empower investors to vote out bad decisions, but cannot force them to exercise their rights »
The new Companies Act allows minority shareholders to initiate class-action suits and vote out corporate actions inimical to their interests. But empowering investors is only half the battle. For it to translate into better governance at India Inc, public shareholders and the domestic institutions which represent them should be willing to speak up, when companies infringe their rights. So far, there is precious little happening on this front.
All prima facie hollow or empty rhetoric ; in the ultimate analysis, fail to provide any practical solution, easily adoptable and workable, and also take on effectively, without legal recourse - resort to court. What really is called for is an inhouse remedy - within the corporate set-up, with the least hassle ad waste of time and energy.Certainly, legal battle is no way ?!
For instance, the Regulatory Bill pending take-off suffers from the same malady, rather serious drawback; in that , the ultimate resolution of grievances provided for only through a battle in the arena of court.
On shortcomings in invariably suggested recourse to court litigation, what has been said / underlined by legal legends must be taken to be enough or more than adequate; for anyone to be convinced that that is no 'solution' at all; but on the contrary is no different from - blind and deaf leading a blind, if not deaf !
"You can empower investors to vote out bad decisions, but
cannot force them to exercise their rights"
The editorial has tended to play the same old song but not
even in a significantly different tune anyway soothing to the once -for -all
set socalled incorrigible and inscrutable ‘mindset’.
Strikingly reminds one of the undeniable or incontrovertible
truth in the saying, - any creation on earth, not alone ‘animal’, can only be taken to water or fodder but can never be forced or persuaded, against
its wish and will, to drink or bite, - certainly never to gulp down or chew, much
less to assimilate / absorb into the system - CAN ONE, except the invisible
CREATOR, EVER DO?????!!!!!!
Coming down to earth, - does not the whole fallacy or mischief traceable to that remedy of 'recourse to class action' - which is worse than the very ailment/ evil itself sought to be remedied ?!
ICAI
ICAI Launches E-Book “Guidance Note on Audit of Books (2014 Edition)
prev.
CD
Says respect dividing line of policy-making and policing »
Effective traffic management saves both time and precious lives. If it takes a movie to drive home this point, so be it. »
