https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195012 Genuine retail IPO applicants who applied with their own funds were not shown to be mere name lenders, and subsequent off-market transfers of allotted shares did not by itself prove cornering of retail shares or a fictitious benami network. The material relied on, including common addresses, alleged signature differences, and transfer timing and price, was found insufficient to establish manipulative control or the role of key operators. As the alleged wrongful cornering and manipulative conduct were not proved, the basis for disgorgement also failed. Disgorgement requires proof of unlawful gain arising from illegal conduct, and it could not be sustained on these facts. en-us Wed, 30 Dec 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 11 Oct 2017 14:14:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195012 Genuine retail IPO applicants who applied with their own funds were not shown to be mere name lenders, and subsequent off-market transfers of allotted shares did not by itself prove cornering of retail shares or a fictitious benami network. The material relied on, including common addresses, alleged signature differences, and transfer timing and price, was found insufficient to establish manipulative control or the role of key operators. As the alleged wrongful cornering and manipulative conduct were not proved, the basis for disgorgement also failed. Disgorgement requires proof of unlawful gain arising from illegal conduct, and it could not be sustained on these facts. Case-Laws Companies Law Wed, 30 Dec 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195012