Meanwhile, Senior Advocate Darius Khambata, appearing for SEBI, opposed the prayer for stay on the order.
“Facts before SEBI prima facie showed that Chandra and Goenka abused their position as directors of Zee for siphoning off funds for their own benefit. Although they were only holding 3.99% of the total shares at ZEEL, the two of them continued to be at the helm of affairs,” he argued.
He added that the two enjoyed the trust of the shareholders. In view of this, SEBI deemed it fit not to allow the two to continue in their key positions after prima facie evidence emerged that they had siphoned off funds.
“We have a situation before us where the Chairman Emeritus and CEO of this company are involved in schemes and transactions through which vast amounts of public money belonging to listed companies are diverted to private entities owned and controlled by these persons,” Khambata urged the tribunal to note.
He concluded that SEBI had put the onus on discharging the burden on Goenka and Chandra, and that it was important for them to avail that opportunity.
Source: Barandbench
