https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289779 The court dismissed the application for interim injunction, ruling in favor of the respondent. The court found that the respondent's actions in reviewing and altering the credit rating were within their rights and obligations, based on available information. It was noted that there was no mandate requiring the respondent to wait for the audited accounts before conducting the review. The court also considered the balance of convenience and potential harm to investors, concluding that granting an interim injunction would prejudice the respondent's statutory obligations. The applicant's allegations of irregularity and mala fide actions were dismissed due to lack of evidence. en-us Fri, 23 Jun 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 21 Aug 2020 11:34:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289779 The court dismissed the application for interim injunction, ruling in favor of the respondent. The court found that the respondent's actions in reviewing and altering the credit rating were within their rights and obligations, based on available information. It was noted that there was no mandate requiring the respondent to wait for the audited accounts before conducting the review. The court also considered the balance of convenience and potential harm to investors, concluding that granting an interim injunction would prejudice the respondent's statutory obligations. The applicant's allegations of irregularity and mala fide actions were dismissed due to lack of evidence. Case-Laws SEBI Fri, 23 Jun 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289779