https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401230 A stock exchange circular prescribing trading exposure limits and withdrawal of trading facilities was upheld as an operational measure validly issued within pre-approved bye-laws, so no separate prior approval was required. The circular was also held consistent with the closing-out framework, because the residuary bye-law permitted prescription of the manner and conditions for closing out in situations beyond ordinary delivery default. Membership obligations continued despite withdrawal of trading facilities, so the member remained bound to maintain required deposits and capital adequacy. As to withheld securities, the scheme required their handling in accordance with vesting and regulatory discretion; there was no automatic duty to realise them forthwith or to register them immediately in the exchange's or clearing corporation's name. en-us Fri, 20 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 02 Dec 2020 09:51:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401230 A stock exchange circular prescribing trading exposure limits and withdrawal of trading facilities was upheld as an operational measure validly issued within pre-approved bye-laws, so no separate prior approval was required. The circular was also held consistent with the closing-out framework, because the residuary bye-law permitted prescription of the manner and conditions for closing out in situations beyond ordinary delivery default. Membership obligations continued despite withdrawal of trading facilities, so the member remained bound to maintain required deposits and capital adequacy. As to withheld securities, the scheme required their handling in accordance with vesting and regulatory discretion; there was no automatic duty to realise them forthwith or to register them immediately in the exchange's or clearing corporation's name. Case-Laws SEBI Fri, 20 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401230