THE KETAN PAREKH SCAM

THE FACTORS THAT HELPED THE MAN

According to market sources, though Ketan Parekh [KP] was a successful broker, he did not have the money to buy large stakes. According to a report ^[1] 12 lakh shares of Global in July 1999 would have cost KP around Rs 200 million. The stake in Aftek Infosys would have cost him Rs 50 million, while the Zee and HFCL stakes would have cost Rs 250 million each. Analysts claimed that KP borrowed from various companies and banks for this purpose. His financing methods were fairly simple. He bought shares when they were trading at low prices and saw the prices go up in the bull market while continuously trading. When the price was high enough, he pledged the shares with banks as collateral for funds. He also borrowed from companies like HFCL.
 

The second route was borrowing from a MMCB branch at Mandvi (Mumbai), where different companies owned by KP and his associates had accounts.KP used around 16 such accounts, either directly or through other broker firms, to obtain funds. Apart from direct borrowings by KP-owned finance companies, a few brokers were also believed to have taken loans on his behalf. It was alleged that Madhur Capital, a company run by Vinit Parikh, the son of MMCB Chairman Ramesh Parikh, had acted on behalf of KP to borrow funds. KP reportedly used his BoI accounts to discount 248 pay orders worth about Rs 24 billion between January and March 2001. BoI's losses eventually amounted to well above Rs 1.2 billion.

The MMCB pay order issue hit several public sector banks very hard. These included big names such as the State Bank of India, Bank of India and the Punjab National Bank, all of whom lost huge amounts in the scam. It was also alleged that Global Trust Bank (GTB) issued loans to KP and its exposure to the capital markets was above the prescribed limits. According to media reports, KP and his associates held around 4-10% stake in the bank. There were also allegations that KP, with the support of GTB's former CMD Ramesh Gelli, rigged the prices of the GTB scrip for a favorable swap ratio^[3]  before its proposed merger with UTI Bank.

KP's modus operandi of raising funds by offering shares as collateral security to the banks worked well as long as the share prices were rising, but it reversed when the markets started crashing in March 2000. The crash, which was led by a fall in the NASDAQ, saw the K-10 stocks also declining. KP was asked to either pledge more shares as collateral or return some of the borrowed money. In either case, it put pressure on his financials. By April 2000, mutual funds substantially reduced their exposure in the K-10 stocks. In the next two months, while the Sensex declined by 23% and the NASDAQ by 35.9%, the K-10 stocks declined by an alarming 67%.

However, with improvements in the global technology stock markets, the K-10 stocks began picking up again in May 2000. HFCL nearly doubled from Rs 790 to Rs 1,353 by July 2000, while Global shot up to Rs 1,153. Aftek Infosys was also trading at above Rs 1000.

In December 2000, the NASDAQ crashed again and technology stocks took the hardest beating ever in the US. Led by doubts regarding the future of technology stocks, prices started falling across the globe and mutual funds and brokers began selling them. KP began to have liquidity problems and lost a lot of money during that period

It was alleged that 'bear hammering' of KP's stocks eventually led to payment problems in the markets. The Calcutta Stock Exchange's (CSE) payment crisis was one of the biggest setbacks for KP. The CSE was critical for KP's operation due to three reasons. One, the lack of regulations and surveillance on the bourse allowed a highly illegal and volatile badla business (Refer Exhibit III). Two, the exchange had the third-highest volumes in the country after NSE and BSE. Three, CSE helped KP to cover his operations from his rivals in Mumbai. Brokers at CSE used to buy shares at KP's behest. Though officially the scrips were in the brokers' names, unofficially KP held them. KP used to cover any losses that occurred due to price shortfall of the scrips and paid a 2.5% weekly interest to the brokers.

By February 2001, the scrips held by KP's brokers at CSE were reduced to an estimated Rs 6-7 billion from their initial worth of Rs 12 billion. The situation worsened as KP's badla payments of Rs 5-6 billion were not honored on time for the settlement and about 70 CSE brokers, including the top three brokers of the CSE (Dinesh Singhania, Sanjay Khemani and Ashok Podar) defaulted on their payments. By mid-March, the value of stocks held by CSE brokers went down further to around Rs 2.5-3 billion. The CSE brokers started pressurizing KP for payments. KP again turned to MMCB to get loans. The outflow of funds from MMCB had increased considerably form January 2001. Also, while the earlier loans to KP were against proper collateral and with adequate documentation, it was alleged that this time KP was allowed to borrow without any security.

By now, SEBI was implementing several measures to control the damage. An additional 10% deposit margin was imposed on outstanding net sales in the stock markets. Also, the limit for application of the additional volatility margins was lowered from 80% to 60%. To revive the markets, SEBI imposed restriction on short sales^[4] and ordered that the sale of shares had to be followed by deliveries. It suspended all the broker member directors of BSE's governing board. SEBI also banned trading by all stock exchange presidents, vice-presidents and treasurers. A historical decision to ban the badla system in the country was taken, effective from July 2001, and a rolling settlement system for 200 Group Ashares^[5] was introduced on the BSE.

[1] Businessworld, 16 April, 2001.

[2] A bank issues a pay order after it is clear that the customer's account has sufficient funds.

[3]  The merger was later cancelled

[4] Selling of shares without physically possessing them. Usually the speculator promises to deliver the shares in future anticipating a fall in prices. If the price falls, he buys the shares at the lower rate, and makes a profit on the difference. If prices rise, he buys the shares at the higher price, and sustains a loss.

[5]  Group A shares are otherwise known as specified shares. These companies have the best fundamentals and growth prospects. The trading interest in these shares is high and certain exchanges also offer the carry-forward facility, which enables speculative trading of these shares. Because of the high trading volumes, the spreads are low and it is possible to easily enter and exit from these shares.