Professional Documents
Culture Documents
dated June 03, 2011 dealing with the processing of investor complaints
required to view the complaints pending against them, redress them and
submit Action Taken Reports (ATRs) electronically in SCORES. As the
in the format annexed to the said Circular. However, it was observed that
2. In order to further remind the Noticee about the compliance with the
requirements as laid down in the SEBI Circular dated June 03, 2011, letter
dated November 14, 2011 was sent to the Noticee informing about the
Page 1 of 5
such company to redress the investor complaint. It was observed that one
and adjudge under Section 15C of the SEBI Act, 1992, the alleged
violations committed by the Noticee. Pursuant to the transfer of Shri
July 31, 2013, calling upon the Noticee to show cause why an inquiry
should not be held against it under Rule 4(3) of the Adjudication Rules
read with Section 15I of the SEBI Act, 1992 for the alleged violations.
6. The aforesaid SCN was duly delivered to the Noticee through the
Department of Post. Vide letter dated September 07, 2013 the Noticee
submitted its reply to the SCN and inter alia made the following
submissions:
Page 2 of 5
Regarding the complaint of Mr Birendra Nath Roy, as mentioned by your good self
in your show cause notice, the same was replied by the Registrar and Transfer
Agent of the company M/s Mas Services Limited, three times as per details below:
Complaint lodged on 27th November 2012, closed on 21st February 2013 by your
office.
Complaint lodged on 4th October 2012, closed on 17th October 2012 by your office.
Complaint lodged on 13th September 2012, closed on 20th September 2012 by your
office.
After satisfactory reply given by us, SEBI had closed the same three times.
We wish to clarify that the company has timely replied to all the letters received
from the investors and specially, no prejudice has been caused to Mr. Birendra
Nath Roy. Therefore your goodself is requested to withdraw/drop the Show Cause
Notice issued against the company.
Representatives (AR) of the Noticee and inter alia made the following
submissions:
B. Whether the Noticee is liable for monetary penalty under Section 15C
of the SEBI Act, 1992?
FINDINGS
Page 3 of 5
provided by SEBI. Further, vide letter dated November 14, 2011 the
Noticee was informed about the commencement of SCORES and the
2013 and February 23, 2015 has submitted that it had made an
2012 and received SCORES authentication vide email dated January 05,
2012. Regarding the one pending investor complaint, as mentioned in the
SCN, the Noticee has stated that it had resolved the same on September
20, 2012. Subsequently, SEBI has also confirmed that the Noticee had
11. Since, the Noticee had obtained SCORES authentication and had taken
13. Since the allegation against the Noticee of not resolving the investor
grievance pending against it has not been established; therefore, the
Page 4 of 5
Noticee is not liable for monetary penalty under Section 15C of the SEBI
Act, 1992.
14. Since, the Noticee is not liable for monetary penalty in the instant matter,
this issue deserves no consideration.
ORDER
15. In view of my findings noted in the preceding paragraphs, I hereby
16. In terms of the provisions of Rule 6 of the SEBI (Procedure for Holding
Jayanta Jash
Adjudicating Officer
Page 5 of 5