https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460167 A writ petition challenged the constitutional validity of sections 11, 11B and 19 of the SEBI Act, 1992 and SEBI's order dated 28 December 2011 on grounds of lack of jurisdiction and non-application of mind. At the interim stage, the Calcutta HC declined to stay operation of the impugned order because the balance of convenience did not favour stay. The petition was admitted, SEBI was permitted to continue the investigation, and it was restrained from passing any further order in the pending proceedings, with liberty to seek interim relief in respect of the specified direction. en-us Wed, 08 Feb 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 14 Jan 2025 18:37:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460167 A writ petition challenged the constitutional validity of sections 11, 11B and 19 of the SEBI Act, 1992 and SEBI's order dated 28 December 2011 on grounds of lack of jurisdiction and non-application of mind. At the interim stage, the Calcutta HC declined to stay operation of the impugned order because the balance of convenience did not favour stay. The petition was admitted, SEBI was permitted to continue the investigation, and it was restrained from passing any further order in the pending proceedings, with liberty to seek interim relief in respect of the specified direction. Case-Laws SEBI Wed, 08 Feb 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460167