•  •  Dark Mode

Your Interests & Preferences

I am a...

law firm lawyer
in-house company lawyer
litigation lawyer
law student
aspiring student

Website Look & Feel

 •  •  Dark Mode
Blog Layout

Save preferences
An estimated 29-minute read
 Email  Facebook  Tweet  Linked-in

Following up the success of the annual GNLU International Moot Court Competition 2015, GNLU is proud to announce a new annual national moot court competition- The GNLU Moot on Securities and Investment Law which is India's first moot court competition on Investment and Securities Law.

The inaugural edition of GMSIL endeavours to develop the research and advocacy skills of students in the area of Securities and Investment Law. The Moot Problem of GMSIL ’15 is based on the new insider trading regulations and the forum of adjudication of the dispute for this edition of the competition is Securities Appellate Tribunal.


The moot court competition officially begins tomorrow at 5 p.m. We shall be bringing you live and exclusive updates from the opening ceremony onwards! Do remember to follow us on our twitter and facebook pages.

Stay tuned for updates!


5:27pm: The Opening Ceremony is about to begin!

5:45pm: Teams are registering now. Each team gets GMSIL folders, tee shirts and a box of cookies!



5:50pm: Those cookies look really yummy!



And there is a handwritten good luck note as well!


5:52pm: Lots of prizes and trophies up for grabs at GMSIL 2015!




5:59pm: There could be no better way to begin a moot than with these scrumptious cookies!



6:04pm: Registration is to be followed by the opening ceremony, researchers test and welcome dinner!

6:13pm: Harshdeep Singh & Udita Bhat of the organising committee are hosting the opening ceremony. The opening ceremony is now underway!



6:15pm: Mention is being made of our generous sponsors - BSE Investor Protection Fund, Manupatra, Wolter Kluwers, LexWitness and Uber - who have played a part in making this event possible.

6:17pm: On the dias we have, Dr. Bimal N. Patel, Director of GNLU, Mr. Girish R. Faculty Convenor of GMSIL, Dr. Biswal, Dean of Academic Affairs and Dr. Thomas Mathew, Registrar GNLU.


6:19pm: Dr. Patel begins his welcome address by mentioning that the proposal for this innaugural competition came from the students themselves.

6:20pm: He now commends the Organizing Committee on its professional conduct & dedicated nature.

6:21pm: Dr. Patel mentions that while GIMC is an international moot, GNLU hopes to have maximum participation from national teams for GMSIL even to the extent that regional rounds may have to be conducted for it.

6:26pm: Dr. Patel ends his speech by thanking the sponsors and the judges for their support. He also mentions other events taking place in GNLU such as the lecture by the Attorney General of India.

6:27pm: Dr. Mamta Biswal, Dean of Academic Affairs is now at the podium. She commends the initiative emphasizing the need for students to learn the skills of advocacy in this field.

6:32pm: Dr Biswal appreciates that the focus of the problem of GMSIL 2016 is on Insider Trading and mentions the recent judgements and decisions regarding Insider Trading.


"Everyone will not be the winner of the moot, but we will all be winners by learning advocacy skills and interpretation."

6:37pm: Prof Girish R., Faculty Convenor walks to the podium to much applause from the Organising Committee.He begins by noting that he has been convenor of GIMC for 5 years but till now has not had an opportunity to be the Innaugural Convenor.



6:40pm: He is regaling the audience with the story of how the moot came to be. He mentions that GNLU considered hosting a moot on various themes such as trial advocacy, arbitration etc and finally decided upon Securities and Investment Law based upon students' suggestions. He also notes that Dr. Patel, Director of GNLU promptly promised full support for the moot.

6:42pm: He is now mentioning how the problem has been drafted by a highly qualified and well renowned person from the field whose name shall be revealed later.

6:43pm: He now requests the teams to make sure that they have properly familiarised themselves with the GMSIL 2016 rules.

6:44pm: The teams are now paying keen attention as the Faculty Convenor announces additional prizes apart from the trophies and cash prizes that had been declared earlier.

6:45pm: The Winners can now look forward to Books from Wolters Kluwer and one year subscription as a prize from Manupatra.

6:47pm: He ends his address by mentioning various other initiatives of GNLU including certificates courses, journals and lectures and invites the participants to take advantage of these.

6:50pm: Dr. Thomas Mathew, Registrar of GNLU is now delivering the vote of thanks.

6:54pm: GMSIL 2015 Online Resource Partner Manupatra is now presenting a demonstration of their online legal database for the benefit of the participants.

7:28pm: The participants briefing has come to an end. Researchers are now heading for the researchers' test.

7:30pm: The Best Researcher prize shall be determined on the basis of the highest score in this 50 marks MCQ test.

7:32pm: The Best Researcher shall be taking home a Rs. 5000 cash prize, a trophy and one year subscription to Manupatra. Good luck to all researchers!


8:46pm: Researchers Test has now concluded. Everyone is heading over for the Welcome Dinner.


10:00am: The courtrooms are ready for the rounds. The preliminary rounds shall begin any moment now.

b2ap3_thumbnail_courtroom-2.jpg b2ap3_thumbnail_courtroom.jpg


11:00 a.m : The rounds have started with the participants putting forth their arguments brilliantly!



4:00pm: Take a look at the participants photgraph with the preliminary round judges!


19:00pm : It's been a long day of prelim rounds.









20:24pm: The last prelim round is now underway. Once it is over we shall have the result. Stay tuned for result updates!

10:46pm: The Results are out!!!! The following team codes as mentioned below have qualified for the Quarter Finals.

Team Code: 118

Team Code: 102

Team Code: 130

Team Code: 125

Team Code: 123

Team Code: 124

Team Code: 120

Team Code: 104

Keep a lookout for updates as the identities of the teams shall be revealed tomorrow morning at 8:30am. Stay tuned for photographs from the Quarter Finals as well as live feed from the Semi Finals and Finals as well!

9:00 a.m : The following teams are arguing in the quarter finals today!

Kerala Law Academy Law College, University of Kerala, THiruvananthapura

ILS Law College, Pune

Symbiosis Law School,Pune

National Law University- Orissa

Army Institute of Law, Mohali

School of Law, Christ University,Bangalore

Damodaram Sanjivayya National Law University, Vishakhapatnam

Rajiv Gandhi National University of Law,Patiala

9:30 a.m : The participants are being questioned by the judges to which they are responding to in a very erudite manner!


10:45 a.m : The quarter final rounds are now over!

11:05 a.m : The semi final rounds will start at 1:00 p.m!

12:00 p.m : And the results for the quarter finals are here!!! The teams qualifying for the semi final rounds are -

School of Law, Christ University, Bangalore

ILS Law College, Pune

Army Institute of Law, Mohali

Symbiosis Law School, Pune

12:06 p.m : The semi final rounds will start at 1:00 p.m!!

12:30 p.m : The semi final judges are now attending the judges' briefing.

The semifinals shall begin at 1:00 pm!
12:31 p.m : The courtrooms are almost ready! The semi finals will be adjudged by a panel of 3 judges!
12:50 pm : The judges adjucating the rounds in Court Room 1 and Court Room 2 are :
Mr. Anil Choudhary
Ms. Veena Sivaramakrishnan
Mr. Tejesh Chitlangi
Mr. Sumit Agarwal
Mr. Gagan sharma
Mr. Rishabh sancheti
1:05 p.m : The teams have arrived in the both the courtrooms!
1:10 p.m (Cr-1) : The appellant speaker has started to speak and has laid down a clear structure of the arguments! The speaker takes the permission of the bench to take a certain judgement to cite from the fellow appelllant speaker and directs the judge to take a look at it.
1:15 p.m (Cr-1) : The judge says that they are aware of the procedure and the speaker should proceed with the arguments!
1:15 p.m. (Cr-2) : The first speaker has arisen to argue her case in front of the bench. The bench has requested her to make more objective arguments as the matter is technical in nature.
1:18 p.m (Cr-1) : The Speaker now faces a barrage of questions from Mr. Anil Choudhary and Ms. Veena Sivaramakrishnan with respect to the procedure.
1:19 p.m. (Cr-1): The Speaker now faces questions from Mr. Tejas Chitlangi pertaining to Clause 36 of the Listing Agreement and an event requiring immediate disclosure.
1:20 p.m. (Cr-2) : The bench is grilling the speaker with several tough questions, and they have seemed to achieve their objective. They’ve thrown her off guard and she pleads ignorance.
1:21 p.m. (Cr-1): Mr. Choudhary points out to the Speaker that seven days is a lot of time after the receipt of notice.
1:23 p.m. (Cr-1): The Speaker cites Shreya Singhal v. Union of India in an attempt to smartly answer twin questions from Mr. Chitlangi and Mr. Choudhary.
1:24 p.m. (Cr-1): Ms. Sivaramakrishnan asks the Speaker if a lawsuit of Rs.100 crores qualifies as 'material' or not.
1:25 p.m. (Cr-1): The Speaker reiterates her preliminary contention only to elicit a series of questions from Mr. Choudhary.
1:25 p.m. (Cr-2) : Speaker One bounces back from the ground. The argument on disclosure norms seems to be her forte.
The bench has now bombarded her with generic questions relating to SEBI orders and their binding nature on the High Court, and she falters again.
1:27 p.m. (Cr-1): Ms. Sivaramakrishnan questions the Speaker about how she can cite the DLF case when the facts are dissimilar.
1:27 p.m. (Cr-1): Redirecting the attention of the judges to Shreya Singhal, the Speaker tries very hard to establish what qualifies as institution and what does not while the bench keenly listens.
1:29 p.m. (Cr-1) : Mr. Choudhary emphasises on the duty to disclose and accuses the company of taking the easy way out!
1:30 p.m. (Cr-1) : The Speaker now pleads for an extension of two minutes.
1:30 p.m. (Cr-2) : The arguments have over-run the prescribed time limit, the judges have allowed for extra time so that Speaker One may complete her arguments.
1:33 p.m. (Cr-1) : The Speaker tries to wrap up her remaining arguments as she's running short of time. She's stopped in her tracks by questions from the Bench. She stresses on the lack of evidence and makes use of the facts to supplant her contention. She has now finished her argument.
1:35 p.m. (Cr-1) : The Second Speaker for the Appellants approaches the podium and begins the schematic overview of his argument in a calm and composed manner.
1:35 p.m. (Cr-2) : The judges are referring to the provisions of ICDR and FDI guidelines. Mr Sancheti tells the speaker that she is appearing before the SAT and not a criminal court, and she should frame her arguments accordingly.
1:37 p.m. (Cr-1): Mr.Choudhary questions the Speaker on what constitutes a capital market.
1:40 p.m. (Cr-1): Mr. Choudhary and Mr.Chitlangi dismiss an argument raised by the Speaker and term it as 'incorrect'. However, the Speaker handles the questions posed to him with sustained composure.
1:42 p.m. (Cr-1) : Ms. Chitlangi asks the Speaker on the effect of a prohibitory SEBI order on the company. The Speaker now presents his argument on price sensitive information.
1:42 p.m. (Cr-2) : The Second Speaker from the appellants is now appearing before the bench. She would be arguing on the issue of insider trading. The bench asks her whether mens rea is a requirement for insider trading.
1:45 p.m. (Cr-1): Mr.Choudhary draws the attention of the speaker to the aspect of due diligence, unaudited accounts and insider trading.
1:45 p.m. (Cr-1): The Speaker for the appellant receives a chit from his co-oralist. This might just help him navigate the questions thrown at him by the Bench. He now places reliance on the Anand Harish case only to find himself targeted by another question from Mr.Choudhary.
1:48 p.m. (Cr-2) : Sumit Agarwal from SEBI asks the speaker to validate her arguments with a precedent and she says she’s come empty handed. The judges are not too happy with her lack of conviction.
1:49 p.m. (Cr-1): The Bench gives the Speaker an extension of one minute to summarise and complete his argument. The Speaker maintains his clarity and tone as he reiterates his stance as a Counsel for HNF that the information does not qualify as unpublished price sensitive information.
1:53 p.m. (Cr-1): The First Speaker for the Respondents begins his oral submission.
1:54 p.m. (Cr-2) : Some whispered conversation between the two speakers from the respondent side after the new line of questioning begins.
1:56 p.m. (Cr-1) : The Speaker contends that a considerable amount of time has elapsed within which the materiality could have been determined. He further stresses on the definition of the word 'event'.
1:58 p.m. (Cr-2) : Speaker Two seems to be fumbling over her fundamentals of law. She hurriedly chooses to argue another issue as time is running out.
1:58 p.m. (Cr-1) : Ms. Veena Sivarmakrishnan questions the speaker on the "reasonability test" and the "materiality test".
1:59 p.m (Cr-1) : The speaker argues about the reasonability of disclosure and the quantitatve factors. He also answers questions asked by Mr. Anil Choudhury on the same area.
2:01 p.m. (Cr-2) : The arguments from the appellants have come to an end, now Speaker One from the respondents has stepped up to the podium.
2:05 p.m. (Cr-1): Speaker now  presents his submission pertaining to his second argument. He talks about the definition of the word 'dispute'. He now proceeds to the determination of materiality by relying on the 'probability magnitude' test, a concept borrowed from American jurisprudence.
2:09 p.m. (Cr-2) : Speaker One is scurrying through several provisions from the compendium and beautifying her arguments with her courtroom mannerism. 
2:08 p.m. (Cr-1) : Speaker now presents oral arguments on FDI compliance and emphasises on the thin line between the B2B and B2C model in the factual matrix. Mr.Choudhary presents the Speaker with another question pertaining to the ICDR and passing of the DRHP. 
2:10 p.m. (Cr-1): The Speaker seeks an extension of half a minute to conclude his arguments, which is granted. Ms. Sivaramakrishnan questions the speaker on FDI and the business model in this case.
2:12 p.m. (Cr-2) : The researcher from the respondent’s side passes a note to the speaker to ease out her arguments which were being questioned by the bench.
2:12 p.m.(Cr-1) : Speaker reiterates that SEBI has performed its duty as he comes to the end of his oral argument.
2:14 p.m. (Cr-1) : The Second Speaker for the Respondents begins his oral arguments. Ms. Sivaramakrishnan is quick to question him regarding the provisions under which SEBI seeks to penalise the Appellants.
2:15 p.m. (Cr-2) : Speaker One talks about disclosures very confidently, playing her part as a SEBI Counsel very well.
2:15 p.m. (Cr-2) : Speaker One scurries to finish her arguments as time is about to end. In hastening, she misspeaks and her actions backfire.
2:16 p.m. (Cr-1) : The Speaker claims that the Appellants have flouted multiple requirements of the ICDR and made a 'wrongful gain' only to attract questions from Mr.Choudhary.
2:19 p.m.(Cr-1) : Mr.Choudhary grills the Speaker on how the figure of 37 crores was calculated.
2:21 p.m. (Cr-1) : Speaker directs the attention of the Bench to his compendium to supplement his contention regarding preferential issue. He cites the Sterlite vs. SEBI case. He now moves on to answer a question from Mr.Chitlangi while retaining his composure.
2:23 p.m. (Cr-1) : Speaker now cites Ketan Parikh case to highlight the importance of circumstantial evidence. Mr.Chitlangi is quick to pose another question. Speaker moves on to his argument on insider trading. He lays down the outline of his argument.
2:25 p.m. (Cr-2) : Speaker Two steps up to the podium and is greeted with a volley of generic questions from the Bench.
2:26 p.m. (Cr-1): Mr.Choudhary questions the Speaker on unpublished price sensitive information. The Speaker now answers questions about the Memorandum of Understanding.
2:30 p.m. (Cr-1) : Ms.Sivaramakrishnan asks the Speaker about the MoU becoming a contract. Mr.Choudhary refuses to buy his contention. Ms. Sivaramakrishnan asks the Speaker on the concealment of commercial terms. The Speaker is unable to answer the same.
2:33 p.m. (Cr-1) : Speaker gets an extension of half a minute to complete his argument pertaining to UPSI and highlights the need to have a trading plan. Mr.Choudhary is quick to remark that a trading plan is not mandatory.
2:35 p.m. (Cr-1) : Speaker for the Appellants begins her rebuttal.
2:36 p.m. (Cr-2) : Speaker Two is confidently able to handle the her stand on the arguments. She is getting ample help from her team, and is able to present a case law to validate her point of law.
2:41 p.m. (Cr-1) : Speaker for the Appellants has finished her rebuttal. The Speaker for the Respondents now approaches the podium for their rebuttal.
2:44 p.m. (Cr-1) : Speaker for the Respondents has completed the rebuttals
2:45 p.m. (Cr-2) : Speaker Two  from the Respondent's side is being tested on facts by the esteemed judges. She seems to be well versed with the intricacies of the moot problem.
2:48 p.m. (Cr-2) : Speaker Two argues that Principles of Natural Justice have not been violated. The bench bombards her with like questions and the time hurries to an end.
2:50 p.m. (Cr-1) : The Appellants were Symbiosis Law School,Pune and the respondents were School of Law, Christ University.
2:51 p.m. (Cr-2) : Appellant have come forward with four points to rebut the arguments of the respondent. The bench instructs that they shouldn’t argue their own case, and rebut their opponents arguments only.
2:54 p.m. (Cr-2) : Mr. Sancheti is not buying any rebuttals of the appellants and now asks the respondents to come up with their rebuttals.
2:56 p.m. (Cr-2) : The Appellants are ILS Law College, Pune and the respondents are Army Institute of Law, Mohali.
3:00 p.m. : Now, the semi- finals have come to an end! We are waiting for the results after two intense rounds! Stay tuned to find out who the final two contenders are! 
3:30 p.m. : The Results are out! And the final contenders of the GNLU Securities and Investment Law, 2015 are :
School of Law, Christ University, Bangalore (Appellants)
Army Institute of Law, Mohali (Respondents)
4:00 p.m. : The final rounds are being adjudicated by a bench of 5 judges consisting of -
Hon'ble (Mr.) Justice Akil Kureshi
Mr. Biswajit Bhattacharya, Judge at the Gujarat HC
Mr. Sandeep Parekh, Founder of Finsec law Advisors And Former ASG
Mr. Mihir Thakore, Senior Advocate at the Gujarat HC
Ms. Dharmishtha Raval, Advocate at the Gujarat HC and Member of the SEBI Advisory Committee on Mutual Funds 
4:01 p.m: The judges and the participants have entered the court room and the rounds are going to begin!
4:12 p.m. : The first Speaker for the Appellants raises his first contention pertaining to what constitutes materiality of an event.  
4:13 p.m.: Speaker substantiates on the aspect of delay.
4:13p.m.: Appellant Speaker 1 has commenced his pleadings with the permission of the bench.
4:14 p.m.: Speaker cites the NDTV case to supplement his argument to justify delay. 
4:15 p.m.: The appellant speaker seeks permission to proceed with his second argument, upon which one of the judges states that if he is satisfied, he should proceed & they shall question him regarding the same at a later stage.
4:16 p.m.: Speaker draws a distinction between the DLF case and the case at hand. He further relies on the 'probability test' to reinforce his argument pertaining to legal notice.
4:17 p.m.: Hon'ble Justice Akil Kureshi questions the appellant on his reliance upon the DLF case & asks him to furnish the facts as well as the forum of the case.
4:18 p.m. : Non-disclosure of the legal notice is justified by the Speaker.
4:20 p.m. : Speaker further raises a contention that flooding the prospectus with frivolous information is not a necessity.
4:22 p.m. : Speaker for the Appellants is presenting his argument on intermediary liability. Further, he states that Trad Exchange fits the bill of a B2C model.
4:24 p.m. : The appellant speaker is now questioned by Judge Bhattacharya upon the automatic approval he mentioned in his pleadings & further upon who accords such approval. They further ask for clarifications upon the model B2B argued by him.
4:24 p.m. : Speaker now faces questioning from Mr.Bhattacharya as regards approval from RBI for the B2B transaction. Speaker draws a distinction between B2B and B2C models.
4:27 p.m. : The appellant speaker is asked to distinguish between Foreign Direct Investment & Portfolio Investment. He is asked by Judge Kureshi to focus on his arguments & not to worry about the time as the time consumed in questioning by the judges shall be looked into by them
4:28 p.m. : Speaker argues that the 'marketplace' model comes within the purview of the 'B2B' model.
4:29 p.m. :  Speaker for the Appellant summarises his contention to substantiate his argument that adequate disclosures were made in the prospectus. He presents an arguendo that relies on the inclusion of a risk factor in the prospectus.
4:32 p.m. : As the appellant speaker comes to the close of his arguments, he is questioned by Ms. Dharmishtha Raval & Mr. Mihir Thakore.
4:35 p.m. : Appellant Speaker I has completed his arguments & Appellant Speaker II has now commenced arguing.
4:36 p.m. : The Second Speaker for the Appellants outlines his arguments. He contends that neither has  there been any communication of UPSI nor has there been any trading by any person while in possession of UPSI.
4:38 p.m. : Appellant Speaker II makes use of facts in order to further his contentions.
4:40 p.m. : It is contended by appellant speaker II through citing a case, that if there is termination of the contract in the ordinary course of business, such as in buying & selling of shares & where clients frequently change, such termination is not a violation of PIT.
4:44 p.m. : Appellant Speaker II states that he has now reached the last limb of his argument.
4:44 p.m. : The Second Speaker relies on an arguendo to convince the Bench that even if there was any communication of UPSI, the same was not in violations of the regulations that prohibit insider trading.
4:45 p.m. : The Second Speaker raises a contention that commercial terms were not disclosed and that only a retracted copy of the MoU was provided in response to a question from Ms.Raval.
4:45 p.m. : The Second Speaker comes to the end of his argument on insider trading. He summarises his contentions in a calm and composed manner. He reiterates that the information in question does not qualify as UPSI.
4:47 p.m. : The Speaker now argues upon three tenets- the furtherance of a legitimate objective, the performance of legal duties and the discharging of legal duties.
4:47 p.m. : The Second Speaker patiently answers questions from Ms.Rawal and explains the definition and interpretation of the word 'trading'.
4:50 p.m. : The Second Speaker comes to the aspect of block trade. He relies on the case of Ketan Parikh judgment to shed light on 'off-market' transactionns.
4:52 p.m. :The Second Speaker has two minutes left to complete his oral argument and is faced with a prompt question from the Bench on the execution of block trades. 
4:55 p.m. : The Speaker claims that even if an entity is debarred from accessing the capital market, it can still engage in preferential allotment. 
4:55 p.m. : The Speaker has been accorded a time extension by the bench.
4:57 p.m. : The Second Speaker relies on Chapter VII on ICDR to reinforce his argument and therefore the preferential allotment by the Appellant is justified. 
4:58 p.m. : The Second Speaker relies on a host of judgments to show that the act of debarring a company from accessing the capital market is a punitive action, only to elicit a series of questions from the Bench.
5:01 p.m. : Second Speaker questions the mechanism of calculation of the figure of thirty seven crores. He has now finished his oral argument.
5:01 p.m. : Second Speaker questions the mechanism of calculation of the figure of thirty seven crores. He has now finished his oral argument.
5:03 p.m. : The Speaker is prompted by Hon'ble Justice Akil Kureshi regarding the quantum of 37 crores in the present matter.
5:04 p.m. : Appellant Speaker II rests his case as the Respondent Speaker I commences her submissions. 
5:06 p.m. : The Respondent Speaker refers to FEMA in one of her arguments.
5:07 p.m.  : The First Speaker for the Respondents contends that Trad Exchange slowly changed from a B2B model to a B2C model.
5:09 p.m. : The speaker seems to be rushing through her arguments from the very beginning. Due to her hastening, the clarity of her thoughts have been compromised on.
5:13 p.m.: The Bench questions the Speaker on Non-disclosure.
5:14 p.m. : The speaker explains how the advent of e-commerce has result in the rise of a new model of business B2B2C, which is now being treated as B2C. 
5:14 p.m. : The Speaker now commences with the second limb of her argument.
5:15 p.m. : The Speaker argues that the disclosure has to be immediate in nature.
5:15 p.m. : The Speaker raises the aspect of Clause 36 of the Listing Agreement and argues on the tests of materiality and the tests of disclosure. She argues that selling of counterfeit product would qualify as a material event to be mandatorily reported to the SEBI, which has not happened in this case.
5:15 p.m. : The Speaker raises the aspect of Clause 36 of the Listing Agreement and argues on the tests of materiality and the tests of disclosure. She argues that selling of counterfeit product would qualify as a material event to be mandatorily reported to the SEBI, which has not happened in this case.
5:19 p.m. : The Speaker invoked Section 15J of the SEBI Act.
5:21 p.m. : The Speaker rests her case & as she does, she is questioned about the Foreign Exchange Management Act of 1999 & her point with regards to the same.
5:23 p.m. : The Speaker is now answering questions from the Bench and reiterates that SEBI did not grant approval to the Appellant.
5:24 p.m. : The Speaker is now questioned upon the nature& scope of the Appeal under the SEBI Act flowing to the Securities Appellate Tribunal.
5:25 p.m. : Upon the question raised, the Speaker seeks permission to peruse the Bare Act.
5:27 p.m. : Respondent Speaker II has commenced with her arguments.
5:28 p.m. : The Second Speaker for the Respondents outlines the scheme of her oral submission. Her first argument deals with insider trading.
5:28 p.m. : She contends that the Appellants have abused the market by creating an asymmetrical information situation.
5:30 p.m. : The Speaker elaborates on the concept of insider trading. She presents a contention that HNF is an entity that has engaged in insider trading. Further, she argues on the aspect of unpublished price sensitive information. She says that there are two aspects of UPSI in the given case. She goes on to substantiate her argument.
5:35 p.m. : The Speaker contends that the company made illicit profits. Alleging that the Appellants have engaged in insider trading, she states that the burden of proof is on the Appellants to disprove the misuse of UPSI.
5:36 p.m. : The Speaker relies on circumstantial evidence and an American case to supplement her argument. She now correlates the same with the facts in an attempt to establish that the Appellants have breached the law as regards insider trading. 
5:37 p.m. : The Speaker uses the US v Rajaratnam case now in order to make a point regarding circumstantial evidence.
5:39 p.m. : The SEBI manual is passed to the Respondent Speaker by her teammates to facilitate her in the furtherance of her arguments.
5:46 p.m. : The Speaker emphasises the duty of the SEBI as she alleges that the Appellant has manipulated the market. She relies on Section 12 (a) of the SEBI Act and reiterates the purpose behind the same. She argues that the trading frequency of the Appellant is to be scrutinised and explains how 0.2%of shares is a significant amount. She argues that the Appellant tried to create an artifical market.
5:47 p.m. : Furthermore, she argues that the volume generation that the Appellant has been engaged in is indicative of market manipulation. She alleges that the Appellant has disturbed the market equilibrium. She alleges that there has been collusion between the Appellants to manipulate the market to their advantage. She argues that the series of events must be given great detail to.

5:49 p.m. : She now moves on to her second contention and argues on the aspect of debarring from the capital market. She invokes the equitable doctrine of clean hands.

5:51 p.m. : The Speaker now argues upon the reiteration through the cases that the Tribunal must only be approached if they have 'clean hands'.

5:51 p.m. : She now faces some questions from the Bench.

5:53 p.m. : Questioned on the significance of mens rea in cases of insider trading, she answers calmly that the motive of the Appellant cannot be overlooked.

5:54 p.m. : As the Speaker seeks permission to proceed with her Prayer, she is questioned by the Bench upon the contention made by her regarding the requirement of motive.

5:55 p.m. : The second speaker for the Respondent has now come to the end of her arguments & the rebuttals are taken on by the Appellants.

5:55 p.m. : The Speaker for the Appellant has now approached the podium for the rebuttal.

5:58 p.m. : The Appellants have come to the close of their rebuttals & now the Respondents are putting forth their replies to the rebuttals on a point by point basis.

6:04 p.m. : The Respondent Speaker has now come to the end of her rebuttals & states that it was an honour for her to argue before the bench.
6:06 p.m. : Hon'ble Justice Akil Kureshi commends both the teams on their sincerity & their dedication towards this moot. 
He offers suggestions to the participants & states that in a practical situation the satisfaction of the judge is not sought of & the aim is to make an impression on the minds of the Bench & alight a curiosity for them to seek answers from the participants.
6:08 p.m. : He states that in a moot court, there is no scope for a retake or a second chance & there is the requirement of quick thinking coupled with thorough knowledge. He congratulates the participants as the extempore has been of an impressive nature!
6:11 p.m. : Mr. Biswajit Bhattacharya now talks to the participants & advises them to win over the court, even if they lose the case!
6:40 p.m.: Everyone is now assembling for the Valedictory Ceremony. The Ceremony is being hosted by Esha Meher & Sagar Godbole, members of the GMSIL OC. 
6:45 p.m. : Dr. Bimal N. Patel addresses the gathering by thanking the participants for their dedicated & enthusiastic approach to the moot & the OC Members for the success of GMSIL.
The dignitaries for this function are:

Mr. Ashishkumar Chauhan, M.D. and CEO of  BSE, who is the Guest of Honour for the Ceremony

Hon'ble (Mr.) Justice Akil Kureshi
Mr. Biswajit Bhattacharya, Judge at the Gujarat HC
Mr. Sandeep Parekh, Founder of Finsec law Advisors And Former ASG
Mr. Mihir Thakore, Senior Advocate at the Gujarat HC
Ms. Dharmishtha Raval, Advocate at the Gujarat HC and Member of the SEBI Advisory Committee on Mutual Funds.
Dr. Bimal N. Patel, Director, GNLU 
6:45 p.m. : Hon'ble Justice Akil Kureshi will now speak a few words. Justice Kureshi talks about how legal education has changed over the years. He notes that keen and interested students are joining the profession.  
6:48 p.m. : Justice Kureshi emphasises that every participant will have learnt something at the end of the competition. He says that competitions like GMSIL help prepare one for the challenges of real life.  
6:49 p.m. : Hon'ble Justice Akil Kureshi tells the participants that while a winner will be declared soon & only team can acquire that title, both teams will return having learnt, not only in the legal field, but also how to deal with disappointments as well as achievements,humbly.
6:54 p.m. : Mr. Ashish Chauhan will now address the gathering.
6:56 p.m. : Mr. Ashishkumar Chauhan is now addressing the gathering & he congratulates the winners, participants & the organizers of GMSIL. He talks about the importance of the orderly manner in the functioning of markets, lack of which will lead to a lack of public confidence. 
7:00 p.m. : He states that the current problem is that while it takes us microseconds to transact, there is a massive backlog of cases leading to justice denied which students can help combat. 

7:02 p.m. : Mr. Biswajit Bhattacharya will now enlighten us with a few words.

7:05 p.m. : Mr. Bhattacharya congratulates the student fraternity and the participants. He mentions that India is at crossoroads. He speaks about the institution of judiciary. He specifies that the student fraternity must consider litigation as a career option. 

7:05 p.m. :  He advises students to not chase money, but rather to chase quality work because in turn money will chase you!

7:07 p.m. : Mr.Thakore will now address the gathering and congratulated the students!

7:09 p.m. : Ms. Dharmishtha Rawal will now address the gathering! She mentions that the securities market is extremely lucrative and  expresses her admiration for the participants' ability to answer questions addressed to them.

7:11 p.m. : Mr.Sandeep Parekh will address the gathering!

7:12 p.m. : Mr. Sandeep Parekh wishes the students good luck for their future.

7:15 p.m. : The winner of the first GNLU Moot on Securities and Investment Law is School of Law, Christ University, Bangalore!!!!

The runner up position has been bagged by Army Law School, Mohali!!
7:15 p.m. : The prize for Best Memorial goes to School of law Christ University, Bangalore!!!
7:16 p.m. : The Best Speaker in the preliminary round goes to  Ms. Akhila from ILS Law College, Pune!!
7:16 p.m. : The Best speaker for the finale goes to Mr. Bhagirath from School of Law, Christ University, Bangalore!
7:17 p.m. : The Best Researcher goes to Mr. Rigved Goregaonkar from ILS Law College, Pune!!
7:21 p.m. : Muskan Sharma, Student Convener now addresses the gathering.She thanks the Director for his support, Mr. Girish R., the Faculty Convener for his integral role in the success of GMSIL '15 & the OC for its tireless efforts. 
7:26 p.m. : Mr. Girish R., Faculty Convenor of the Moot Court Committee , now delivers the vote of thanks to the Dignitaries and expresses his gratitude to the sponsors!
Stay tuned till the next edition of the GNLU Securities and Investment Law- 2016!!
This is the GMSIL-PR team signing off! 




Click to show 5 comments
at your own risk
By reading the comments you agree that they are the (often anonymous) personal views and opinions of readers, which may be biased and unreliable, and for which Legally India therefore has no liability. If you believe a comment is inappropriate, please click 'Report to LI' below the comment and we will review it as soon as practicable.

Latest comments