SEBI enforcement action for fraudulent preferential allotment and market manipulation
Padmini Technologies Limited · Technology
The case in brief
Visible before detection
Checks that could have surfaced it, on hindsight
Bank credits vs books
Bank statements would show non-receipt of the Rs. 20 crores claimed as preferential allotment proceeds
Can mislead when: AA only sees the accounts the company links, so an undisclosed account stays invisible. Cash-heavy businesses and timing differences create false flags.
Document authenticity / direct pull
Direct verification with banks and allottees would reveal the false certificates
Can mislead when: The company can refuse consent, and a refusal is itself a flag. Some banks and co-op banks are not on AA yet.
Where Kubr services would have helped
Financial diligence
Offered in India- C1 Bank statements would show non-receipt of the Rs. 20 crores claimed as preferential allotment proceeds
- C5 Direct verification with banks and allottees would reveal the false certificates
Valuation context
Offered in India- Peer multiples and the exit-multiple bridge would have shown how much of the story relied on valuation holding.
Model check
Offered in India- C1 Bank statements would show non-receipt of the Rs. 20 crores claimed as preferential allotment proceeds
IC note
Offered in India- C5 Direct verification with banks and allottees would reveal the false certificates
Mapped from the checks each service runs. A hindsight reading of public records, not a promise that the failure would have been found.
Same pattern
A summary of public documents. It reports what the sources say. It is not Kubr's finding and not a statement of guilt.