- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
Supreme Court permits Reliance appeal against SEBI
Supreme Court permits Reliance appeal against SEBI
Reliance Industries Limited (RIL) appeal seeks entrance to certain documents is allowed today by The Supreme Court. In an investigation by the market regulator into a share acquisition matter documents were relied upon by the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI)
According to NV Ramana, a bench of Chief Justice of India and Justices JK Maheshwari and Hima Kohli SEBI has a duty to act in a fair manner and abstain from avoiding rule of law.
"SEBI as a regulator has a duty to act fairly. It is not to circumvent rule of law and has to show fairness. We allow this petition and direct SEBI to furnish the document sought by RIL," the Court held.
Once the Bombay High Court had rejected its plea, RIL had moved to the top court to admit certain documents that it believed would clear the air on all accusations against the company.
SEBI had assumed irregularities when RIL attained its own shares from 1994 to 2000.
In 2002, the case stopped from a complaint by S Gurumurthy with the SEBI claiming misdeeds.
In 2020, SEBI had moved City Civil and Sessions Court looking for trial of RIL. The court had, however, forbidden the plea citing postponement in acting on the 2002 complaint.
When RIL also moved towards the Bombay High Court, the Appeal against that order was filed before the Bombay High Court looking for three documents relied upon by SEBI.
Before the top court, that plea was disallowed leading to the present appeal.