Companies & Sectors
Contempt application against Mallya and Kingfisher in Karnataka HC

The banks had loaned a total of Rs7,000 crore to Mallya's now defunct airline, which they have been trying to recover

 

17 banks have come together to file a contempt application against Vijay Mallya, Kingfisher Airlines and United Breweries Holdings Limited. 
 
The contempt application was filed in the Karnataka High Court before Justice N K Patil. The banks have pleaded that Mallya reneged on an oral undertaking made in front of the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT).
 
In the proceedings at the DRT, the respondents had agreed that they would not sell, alienate or transfer any assets that were encumbered in the loans from the banks to Mallya and the two companies.
 
Counsel for the banks, N Chinappa was quoted by PTI News as saying, "We have filed a contempt application in the High Court against Kingfisher Airlines, United Breweries Holdings Limited (UBHL) and Dr Vijay Mallya for violating an undertaking given before DRT.”
 
The Judge issued notice to Mallya and the companies listed in the application. The assets in question are shares and real estate
 

 

User

COMMENTS

Chellappa

2 years ago

We see that application of law is very different when it comes to people with money or connections. When is that we can see real justice?

Chellappa

manoharlalsharma

2 years ago

why not merged King Fisher with AIR INDIA a p/u like in banking firmed CENTURION BANK with INDIAN OVEREXERCISE COMMERCIAL BANK to recover dues ? Responsible r ADMIN staff who sectioned such a LARGE FUND.

Will NMDC assets be spun off and will it deliver gains for shareholders?
As a principal supplier of minerals, NMDC plans to scale up its production. While full details are not available, there are possibilities for a spin-off to take care of the steel plant at Chhattisgarh along with all the iron ore operations
 
Iron ore prices in global markets have been coming down drastically in the last few months, more due to the economic run down in China and their slow off take.  At one time, the iron ore price was around $92 per tonne and because of the steep fall in demand, ore with 62% content, delivered to Qingdao, China, has dropped to $68.99 per tonne, as per the Metal Bulletin Ltd.  
 
In a recent televised press conference, Australia's treasurer, Joe Hockey, is reported to have stated that they forecast the iron ore prices to hover around $60 a tonne. The decline in price of ore, which was ruling at $92 has had a great impact on the Australian budget. It has resulted in a fall of about 15% in thermal coal also.
 
In so far as India is concerned, iron ore exports had come to a standstill with more than three-fourths of mines lying idle due to a Supreme Court ban, which has been lifted in stages, and slowly the mining operations are in the process of resuming.  According to a Parliament reply, by Minister of State for Steel and Mines, Vishnudeo Sai, on 1st December, out of 776 mines in the country, 590 are closed.  All the 330 mines in Goa are shut and out of 143 mines, 112 are not operating in Odisha.  As a result of this, the steel industry giants such as JSW Steel and Tata Steel are expected to import as much as 9 mt and 2 mt respectively this year.
 
Mines that are in the clear will be able to produce around 130 million tonnes (mt) of iron ore and the demand is expected to exceed 140 mt, resulting in the import of 10 to 15 mt in 2015.
 
In the case of Tata Steel, mining lease given to them in Jharkhand has now been conditionally renewed and in a similar fashion, thanks to the interim order issued by the High Court, they would be able to ramp up their production of both iron ore and manganese in Odisha.  Because of the closure of the captive mines, Tatas would have to import the iron ore as stated above.
 
As a principal supplier of minerals, NMDC plans to scale up its production, as reported in the press, to double its output by 2018-19.   Narendra Kothari, CMD of NMDC has stated that the production target of 31 million tonnes of iron ore in 2014-15 will be met and their plans are to reach the targets of 60 mt by 2018-19 and 100 mt by 2024-25.  Their plans include enhancing production from existing mines as also opening up new mines, such as Deposit-11 B in the Bailadila sector of Chhattisgarh and Kumaraswamy in Donimalai sector in Karnataka. Within 3 to 8 months, these are expected to add 14 mt to the current output of 30 mt.
 
In addition to these, NMDC's 3 million tonnes steel plant at Jagdalpur is expected to be ready by December 2015 and production to start by 2016.  This will be a major achievement for them in Chhattisgarh.  This will be in addition to their joint venture in Jharkhand with the Jharkhand State Mineral Development Corporation in their projects at Sasangada and Ghatkuri.
 
Therefore, the media report on NMDC setting up a separate operation to deal with iron ore makes interesting reading.  While full details are not available, does this mean, there are possibilities for a spin off to take care of the steel plant at Chhattisgarh along with all the iron ore operations?  If such a move happens, it will be rewarding to its shareholders.  After all, NMDC holds as much as 1300 million tonnes of known high quality iron ore reserves, both in Karnataka and Chhattisgarh. As of March, 2014, the cash reserves of NMDC amounted to Rs18,800 crore. It would be interesting to follow this matter as it develops. 
 
(AK Ramdas has worked with the Engineering Export Promotion Council of the ministry of commerce. He was also associated with various committees of the Council. His international career took him to places like Beirut, Kuwait and Dubai at a time when these were small trading outposts; and later to the US.)
 

User

COMMENTS

Swaminathan Thiagarajan

2 years ago

Nmdc may be having off the steel plant as a subsidiary company. As far as the supply of iron ore is concerned, the same will be from their JV company as per the company press clippings.

Bombay HC bench to rule on post-divorce limitation for appeal

After how much time can a divorced person marry again? Bombay High Court to rule on issue soon

 

A full bench of the Bombay High Court will answer the question on when can a divorce person marry again, while deciding over a reference. A division bench of Justice Oka and Justice Gadkari were referred the case. The 2007 view of a division bench stated that provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act allows 90 days to file an appeal against a divorce decree issued by a family court. The Family Courts Act allows a 30-day period instead.
 
The case is in the context of a Thane resident, who challenged his estranged wife’s marriage to another man. The divorce was issued on 22 April 2013. The husband filed the appeal in Bombay High Court on 3 July 2013. However, six days after the divorce the woman remarried, which was before the completion of 90 days. The man objected to the validity of the woman’s second marriage.
 
The issue which arises for consideration in this Appeal is about the period of limitation available for preferring an appeal against a decree passed by the Family Court. As far as the present appeal is concerned, the impugned decree of divorce has been passed on 22 April 2013 on the petition filed by the respondent, wife.
 
The Memorandum of Appeal was lodged in this Court on 3 July 2013. In the Memorandum of appeal, it is stated that the certified copy of the Judgment and decree was applied for by the appellant, husband on 23 April 2013 and that the certified copy was received on 17 May 2013. The appeal proceeds on the footing that the period of limitation available for preferring an appeal is of 90 days. The issue of limitation in this appeal is very relevant in the context of section 15 of the Hindu Marriage Act,1955 as it is the case of the respondent that she has remarried on 9 July 2013.
 
If the prescribed period of limitation for preferring a Family Court Appeal is taken as 90 days, the marriage will be illegal being contrary to section 15 of the said Act of 1955. If the period of limitation is taken as 30 days, the embargo under section 15 of the said Act of 1955 will not apply. The contention of the learned counsel for the appellant is that the period of limitation of 90 days is available as provided under section 28 of the said Act of 1955. She has placed reliance on the order dated 25th April 2007 passed by a Division Bench of the Court.

User

COMMENTS

Shirish Mudras

2 years ago

finally what's the conclusion?

We are listening!

Solve the equation and enter in the Captcha field.
  Loading...
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email

BUY NOW

The Scam
24 Year Of The Scam: The Perennial Bestseller, reads like a Thriller!
Moneylife Magazine
Fiercely independent and pro-consumer information on personal finance
Stockletters in 3 Flavours
Outstanding research that beats mutual funds year after year
MAS: Complete Online Financial Advisory
(Includes Moneylife Magazine and Lion Stockletter)