Subrata Roy Sahara Faces SEBI Questioning

Subrata Roy Sahara was questioned by the Securities and Exchange Board of India on Wednesday. SEBI questioned three other directors of the Sahara group.
Subrata Roy Sahara was questioned by SEBI.

Subrata Roy Sahara was questioned by SEBI.

MUMBAI: On last Wednesday, the Securities Exchange Board of India questioned Subrata Roy Sahara and three other directors. Though the main thrust of the questioning was to find out the details of Sahara assets, no information is out yet.

Sahara chief and the other directors have presented the details of their personal assets. A Sahara Group press statement which was released after the SEBI questioning said that Subrata Roy Sahara has only Rs.3 Cr worth personal assets.

Earlier the market regulator had warned that they would sell the seized Sahara properties if the Sahara Chief and the directors did not appear in front of them on April 10.

The seized properties include Aamby Valley, a posh project near Pune, and some land parcels in Delhi, Gurgaon and Mumbai.

Ashok Roy Choudhary, Ravi Shanker Dubey and Vandana Bhargava, the three other directors of Sahara Group, were also questioned. Continue reading

Supreme Court Discards Sahara’s Appeal To Review

Supreme Court discarded Sahara’s appeal to have a review on the refund – case. Supreme Court finding no valuable reasons for a review, dismissed the appeal.
Supreme Court discards Sahara's appeal

Supreme Court discards Sahara’s appeal

Sahara’s appeal, against the SC verdict which orders Sahara firms to refund nearly Rs.25,000 Cr to its investors, was turned down by the Supreme Court of India.

Two subsidiary firms of Sahara- Sahara Housing Investment Corporation Ltd (SHICL) as well as Sahara India Real Estate Corporation Ltd (SIRECL) were fined Rs.24000 Cr as they were found guilty of amassing investments. The SC had found that many of the investors’ details lacked clarity.

Being suspicious over their investors’ details the SC had asked the Sahara- firms to pay the fine. Later Sahara claimed that they had already repaid their investors. Continue reading