gayatri projects limited - Edelweiss

order under provisions of section 15 T (2) (b) of the SEBI Act if the company was willing to pay anamount of Rs. 175,000/- as penalty for the alleged violations. The company has in its response datedAugust 4, 2004 denied the alleged violations and also showed its inability to pay the said amount. Thecompany has not received any further communication from SEBI in relation to this matter and theadjudication process is thus still open.b. Gayatri Sugars LimitedSEBI vide their letter dated November 29, 2004 alleged violations to the reporting requirements underregulations 8(3) of the SEBI (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations, 1997(“Takeover Regulations”) for the years 1999, 2000, 2001 & 2002. This letter of the SEBI also referedto the appointment of an adjudicating officer under provisions of the SEBI Act to adjudicate andenquire into such alleged violations. In the said letter, SEBI also stated that it has decided to considerrequest for a consent order under provisions of section 15 T (2) (b) of the SEBI Act if the companywas willing to pay an amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- as penalty for the alleged violations. The company hasin its response vide its letter dated December 29, 2004 stated that there has not been a per seviolation of the regulations as there has been no change in the shareholding from 1999-2002. Thecompany has not received any further communication from SEBI in relation to this matter and theadjudication process is thus still open.c. Gayatri Starchkem LimitedSEBI vide their letter alleged violations to the reporting requirements under various regulations of theSEBI (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations, 1997 (“Takeover Regulations”)for the years 1999, 2000, 2001 & 2002. This letter of the SEBI also refered to the appointment of anadjudicating officer under provisions of the SEBI Act to adjudicate and enquire into such allegedviolations. In the said letter, SEBI also stated that it has decided to consider request for a consentorder under provisions of section 15 T (2) (b) of the SEBI Act if the company willing to pay thepenalty imposed by SEBI for the alleged violations. The company has in its response stated thatthere has not been a per se violation of the regulations as there has been no change in the shareholding.The company has not received any further communication from SEBI in relation to this matter and theadjudication process is thus still open.6. Gayatri Capital Limited, one of our Promoter Group Companies, who is having membership withNational Stock Exchange of India Limited received show cause notice from NSE regarding complaintsreceived by them in respect of non payment of dues, non-receipt of funds on sale of securities andnon receipt of securities for its clients and for violation of regulation in respect of dealing on behalfof unregistered intermediary for which NSE imposed penalty of Rs. 25,000/- on the company and thesame was paid by the company.7. Two of our promoter group companies could not meet their debt obligations.Gayatri Sugars Limited is operating under a CDR scheme since August, 2003. Gayatri Starchkem Limitedoffered an OTS to Financial Institutions/Banks consequent to declaration as Sick Industrial Company byBIFR. The principal amount outstanding for term loan was Rs. 2537.52 lakhs and for working capital wasRs. 447.12 lakhs and as against this, OTS amount offered was Rs. 1268.76 lakhs and Rs. 223.57 lakhs.IDBI (Stressed Assets Stablisation Fund), GIC and Canara Bank (for Term Loan portion) had given theirconsent for the OTS and the consent from Canara Bank (Working capital portion), Corporation bank (WorkingCapital portion), IIBI Ltd., Life Insurance Corporation of India, United India Insurance Company Ltd. andOriental Insurance Company Ltd. are pending. Gayatri Starchkem Limited had already cleared the dues ofIDBI, GIC and Canara Bank (Term Loan portion only). For details please refer to section “Information on ourPromoter Group Companies” on page no. 82 & 83 respectively of the Prospectus.v