SEBI has passed an interim order directing Remac Realty not to collect any money from investors from its existing "schemes"/plans or to launch any new "scheme"/plan
SEBI (Securities and Exchange Board of India) has passed an interim order directing Remac Realty India Ltd., and its directors, Partha Pratim Tewari, Arnab Roy, Ganesh Kumar Bagaria, Leena Tewari, Reena Vijay, Sandip Chattopadhyay and Debapratim Mazumder not to collect any money from investors from its existing "schemes"/plans or to launch any new "scheme"/plan; and to immediately submit the full and detailed inventory of the assets owned by the company out of the amounts collected from the "applicants"/investors under its existing "schemes"/plans, according to a release from the regulator.
The company has been ordered not to dispose of any of the properties, or alienate the assets of the existing "schemes"/plans. Further, it shall not divert any funds raised from public at large, kept in bank account(s) and/or in the custody of the company.
SEBI has ordered the company to provide complete information on its investors and their investments in the company to help in the investigation. Also, the company should provide SEBI details of expenditure incurred under the head "Administration Overheads", duly certified by an auditor.
SEBI’s press release says that, “It is alleged that the company is engaged in fund mobilising activity from the public by floating/ sponsoring/ launching 'collective investment scheme' as defined in Section 11AA of the SEBI Act without obtaining a certificate of registration from SEBI.”
SEBI orders Seashore Securities not to mobilise funds and not to dispose of any assets
The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) has ordered Seashore Securities Limited and its promoters and directors including Prashanta Kumar Dash, Pravat Kumar Dash, Jyotirani Sarangi, Surath Das, Shantiprava Dash, Manoj Kumar Nath, Prativa Dash, Sudhanshu Shekhar Pati, Sapna Jena and Gopal Chandra Sahu from mobilising funds through the issue of redeemable preference shares or through the issuance of equity shares or any other securities, to the public and/ or invite subscription, in any manner whatsoever, either directly or indirectly till further directions.
The company is also prohibited from issuing prospectus or any offer document or issue advertisement for soliciting money from the public for the issue of securities, the SEBI Order added.
With respect to funds already mobilised by the company, the SEBI Order is strict and says, the company shall not dispose any of the properties of the said company or alienate the assets acquired/created through the funds raised from public by issuance of the impugned redeemable preference shares. Also, the company shall not divert any funds raised from public at large through the issuance of the impugned cumulative redeemable preference shares, kept in its bank accounts and/or in the custody of the company without prior permission of SEBI.
Finally, according to the SEBI Order, the company is restrained from accessing the securities market and further prohibited from buying, selling or otherwise dealing in securities and being associated with the securities market.
SEBI is continuing its investigation of the company and its directors, and they are obliged to co-operate in providing both information and documents required.
Hyderabad-based Harshith Enterprises is now the latest and largest stakeholder in Prithvi Information Solutions, according to BSE filings by the company. This company bought the exact number of shares held by Anupama Yellajoshyula in an off market deal. But there is no information about who sold those shares to Harshit, which is also connected to directors of Prithvi
The mystery around stakeholders of Prithvi Information Solutions is, the beleaguered Andhra Pradesh IT company deepens every passing day. The latest is the fact that Hyderabad-based Harshith Enterprises Pvt Ltd has emerged as the largest stakeholder in the company. The MCA21 filings by Harshit Enterprises has listed the gmail id of hyderabad based chartered accountant, A Vijaykumar.
We tracked down Mr Vijaykumar's office and also emailed him for information with regard to Harshit and Anupama. He responded, ""Our firm rendered professional services for incorporating M/s Harshith enterprises p ltd. Neither I nor our firm represent M/s Harshith Enterprises P Ltd hence we cannot comment on any of the queries raised by you." This is interesting because Vijaykumar is on Prithiv's audit committee and, we learn, is closely connected with the promoter group. In fact, informed sources say that it is Vijyakumar who introduced Prithvi Info Solutions and its promoters to Kyko Global, the company which has successfully sued Prithvi Infosolutions in an attempt to recover its own money. Kyko Global is headed by an Indian CEO Mr Kiran Kulkarni.
In September 2012, Anupama Yellajoshyula and another shareholder, Sarat Kumar Addanki, were allotted shares through preferential allotments, as 'non-promoter group' shareholders. This gave Anupama 86.47 lakh shares (24.99% of total shares), with a face value of Rs10 each at a premium of Rs16, for a sum of Rs22.48 crore. BSE filings also indicate that Mr Sarat Kumar Addanki bought 78.80 lakh shares (22.77% of total shares) for Rs20.49 crore during September 2012 with a one year lock-in period.
Since then, as reported by Moneylife, Mr Addanki has denied buying or holding a single share of the company and accused the Prithvi promoters of fraud, identity theft and worse. Mr Addanki who has been shuttling between the US and India due to his mother's illness has also written to the regulators to inform them of the con. Moneylife has copies of his letters to the Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO), the Securities & Exchange Board of India (SEBI) and the Reserve Bank of India (RBI). The letters dated 24 June 2014, allege gross mismanagement, misrepresentation, fraud and potential identity theft. (Read: Prithvi Info Solutions: Second largest stakeholder denies investing in the company!)
That still leaves the mystery of Anupama's shareholding and the new investor Harshit Enterprises, which owns a 24.99% stake in Prithvi Information Solutions. The BSE regulatory filings do not indicate the price at which Harshith Enterprises acquired the shares in an off-market deal. But the fact is that this deal took place on 29 May 2014, the very same day that Moneylife published an article about Anupama Yellajoshyula, the largest stakeholder in the company. (Read:Who is Anupama, the largest stakeholder of Prithvi Info Solutions?).
Anupama, as per the regulatory filings, bought 86.47 lakh shares or 27.99% stake in Prithvi Information Solutions at Rs26 per share or Rs22.48 crore. Similarly, Sarat Kumar is also shown to have bought 78.80 lakh shares or 22.77% stake in the company for Rs20.49 crore. Both Anupama and Sarat bought shares in Prithvi Information Solutions by paying a premium of Rs16 per share, as per the regulatory filing. However, the law firm OLSHAN, claiming to represent Anupama, sent us a "Cease & Desist" letter, hotly denying that Anupama had anything to do with Prithvi. The letter says, Anupama "is not and has never been a shareholder of Prithvi Info Solutions." Subsequently, Moneylife obtained information that Anupama Yellajoshyula's husband was a classmate of Prithvi's promoter Madhavi and Sarat Kumar Addanki. We wrote to him for information but have heard nothing from him.
There is no information available about the price paid by Harshith Enterprises for buying the 24.99% stake in Prithvi Information Solutions. However, according to sources, the company paid Rs6 per share for buying the stake. This also means, that if Anupama Yellajoshyula sold her entire stake, then she has obviously taken on a loss of Rs20 per share, or about Rs17.3 crore on her original investment. But since her law firm claims that she has never held Prithvi shares, it is up to the regulators to find out who is executing these phantom deals in the name of investors residing in the US.
We have once again emailed OLSHAN, the law firm representing Anupama Yellajoshyula and her husband and will incorporate their responses, if any, in this article.