https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293519 Regulations 39 to 41 of the SEBI (Mutual Funds) Regulations, 1996 were upheld as intra vires and constitutional, being a complete code for scheme winding up with adequate investor safeguards. Winding up under Regulation 39(2)(a) requires unit-holders' consent by simple majority before notice under Regulation 39(3) is issued, while Regulation 18(15A) does not apply because winding up is distinct from alteration of scheme attributes. The writ petitions were maintainable against Trustees performing a public function, but the Court would not reappraise the commercial merits of the winding-up decision. Post-notice borrowings and redemptions were impermissible, the Board resolutions had to be disclosed, and SEBI could enforce compliance but not re-decide the winding-up decision under Section 11B. en-us Sat, 24 Oct 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 15 Feb 2021 13:53:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293519 Regulations 39 to 41 of the SEBI (Mutual Funds) Regulations, 1996 were upheld as intra vires and constitutional, being a complete code for scheme winding up with adequate investor safeguards. Winding up under Regulation 39(2)(a) requires unit-holders' consent by simple majority before notice under Regulation 39(3) is issued, while Regulation 18(15A) does not apply because winding up is distinct from alteration of scheme attributes. The writ petitions were maintainable against Trustees performing a public function, but the Court would not reappraise the commercial merits of the winding-up decision. Post-notice borrowings and redemptions were impermissible, the Board resolutions had to be disclosed, and SEBI could enforce compliance but not re-decide the winding-up decision under Section 11B. Case-Laws SEBI Sat, 24 Oct 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293519