SEBI v. Keynote Painting Dealers Private Limited and others (price rise, Jaisukh Dealers, 2022)

Judgment entered

✓ Checked against the primary document on October 8, 2026. The library's summary, tags and figures for this record were compared with the regulator's own document by an AI model (Claude) following written instructions, in a single reading of the order; an independent second reading of 60 SEBI records agreed on every field for 56, the four misses being penalty amounts; a later sample of 50 of the SEBI records added on 9 October agreed on every field for 46. No lawyer has reviewed them. A checked record can still contain errors, and checked does not mean endorsed. See how we check records or report a correction.

Report an error in this record (sebi-57255-price-manipulation-2022) by email

In March 2022 a SEBI whole-time member barred eleven connected entities and individuals from the securities market for six months to one year over trading that drove up the price of Jaisukh Dealers Limited from Rs 25 to Rs 323. Three preferential allottees were ordered to disgorge about Rs 1.54 crore with interest.

The record

What was ordered

Civil penalty

—

Disgorgement

—

Prejudgment interest

—

Total relief

—

Alleged gain

—

A dash means the release did not state a figure we could extract, not that the figure is zero. Penalty and disgorgement are stored separately so aggregates across the library do not double-count the same dollars.

What is alleged to have happened

A SEBI whole-time member, S K Mohanty, decided the matter on 28 March 2022 under the board's directions powers rather than as a penalty adjudication. The eleven noticees are companies and two individuals, Anita Jajodia and Sabita Jajodia, connected to the issuer Jaisukh Dealers Limited, whose shares are listed on BSE. SEBI examined trading from February 2014 to July 2016.

SEBI's investigation grouped 53 connected entities, including the company, its promoters and directors and the noticees. In the first period, from February to August 2014, the price rose from Rs 25 to Rs 323. The group traded among themselves in 31 trades on 19 days, equal to about 70.5 per cent of market volume, and ten of them contributed about 81 per cent of the net last-traded-price rise. In most of those trades the sellers were also group members.

The order holds that the eleven noticees manipulated the price by contributing to the rise, in breach of section 12A of the SEBI Act and regulations 3 and 4 of the PFUTP Regulations. Relying on Supreme Court authority, it states that proof of direct market impact is not required where the intention to manipulate can be inferred. It further finds that three noticees who had received shares through a preferential allotment, Panchshree Logistics, Anita Jajodia and Sabita Jajodia, profited by selling at the inflated price.

The member restrained all eleven from the securities market, for six months in eight cases and one year for those three. He directed the same three to disgorge Rs 13,50,000, Rs 73,53,900 and Rs 66,83,000 respectively, about Rs 1.54 crore in all, with 12 per cent interest from July 2016. No monetary penalty was imposed in this order.

The record does not show whether the order was appealed, whether disgorgement was paid, or what losses other investors suffered.

This library tags the matter as price manipulation and matched orders. The tagging is ours, not the regulator's.

For the regulator's own account of the facts, read the primary document linked above. This page deliberately summarises the structured record rather than reproducing the order.

What technique is this, and how does it work?

This action is tagged with 2 techniques in our taxonomy. The tagging is ours: regulators charge statutory provisions, not technique names, so the mapping is an editorial judgement described in our editorial policy.

• Price manipulation — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.
• Matched orders — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.

Timeline

1. 2022-03-28 SEBI order

Primary documents

Everything on this page derives from the documents below. Where our summary and the primary document disagree, the primary document is right.

• SEBI order
• Order (PDF)

The linked release is published by the issuing regulator under its own terms. Our summary and narrative above are our own writing.

Related actions

Other actions in the library sharing at least one technique tag with this one.

Record added October 8, 2026. submit a correction.