SC raps petitioner for defective plea against Indiabulls
The Supreme Court on Wednesday pulled up for filing a defective application a petitioner, Abhay Yadav, who has alleged that Indiabulls Housing Finance Ltd (IHFL) misappropriated Rs 98,000 crore of public money.
 
Earlier on Wednesday, IHFL senior counsel A.M. Singhvi urged the vacation bench comprising Justices Indira Banerjee and Ajay Rastogi to list the matter for hearing urgently, as frivolous allegations have been made against the company in the petition, which has been deliberately leaked to the media. 
 
The company counsel represented that as a consequence of these acts, IHFL's market capitalisation has been eroded by Rs 8,000 crore in the two days since filing of the petition, causing losses to lakhs of shareholders.
 
The court observed that while the petitioner has sought directions against respondent numbers six and seven, but, surprisingly, no identities have been assigned against them in the writ petition.
 
Singhvi said that the petitioner had deliberately filed the plea in the vacation bench and created circumstances for the press to discuss it.
 
"A petition has been filed against Indiabulls, but the company has not been included in the list of respondents", he said, raising an objection to the petition.
 
The court rapped the petitioner, asking him to rectify the defects and said the matter will be taken up in July.
 
Singhvi said the company is already facing a huge loss in share value arising from the press reports following a plea filed by a milk vendor, who holds a total of only four shares. 
 
The company alleged it is being blackmailed through the use of a novel technique.
 
According to IHFL, Yadav became its shareholder after purchasing the shares from the stock exchange on May 9. 
 
In a statement earlier, IHFL has described the allegations against its Chairman Sameer Gehlaut and other directors as "bizzare" and designed to malign the reputation of the company.
 
The statement came after a plea was filed in the apex court on Monday seeking legal action against Indiabulls, Gehlaut and the other directors for alleged misappropriation of public money. It said thousands of crores had been siphoned off by Gehlaut and the directors of the firm for their personal use.
 
"The total loans on the books of Indiabulls Housing are approx Rs 90,000 crore. The allegation of siphoning-off Rs 98,000 crores is bizarre," the company said in a regulatory filing.
 
The company said that a racket of blackmailers has been trying to extort money from Indiabulls over the last two months threatening to write complaints to various government departments alleging siphoning off Rs 55,000 crore if Rs 10 crore was not paid to them, following which the company filed an FIR on June 4.
 
It further said that one of the people involved in the blackmail was arrested on June 7. Following the arrest, the group of people involved floated another complaint enhancing the amount in question to Rs 98,000 crore.
 
IHFL said the writ petition is a "desperate attempt" to malign its reputation.
 
The statement also said that the petitioner had bought four shares in the company a month back.
 
Disclaimer: Information, facts or opinions expressed in this news article are presented as sourced from IANS and do not reflect views of Moneylife and hence Moneylife is not responsible or liable for the same. As a source and news provider, IANS is responsible for accuracy, completeness, suitability and validity of any information in this article.
  • User

    Sintex Industries Defaults on Rs86 crores of Loan
    Sintex Industries has announced today that it has defaulted in paying interest on 7-year 10.70% secured debentures. The debentures had been issued to six investors in a private placement. The outstanding interest is Rs3.03 crores and principal amount is Rs85.84 crores. In a filing with the BSE, it has claimed that the present liquidity crisis is temporary and will not affect its going concern.
     
    The gross principal amount on which the default above has occurred is Rs
    112.50 crore.
     
    Gujarat-based Sintex Industries has been into textiles and yarn for more 85 years. It is India’s largest producer of corduroy fabrics. In the March quarter, it reported a massive loss of Rs131 crore on a turnover of Rs591.54 crore. The interest cost component was Rs69.71 crore. It had borrowings of Rs5314.58 crore for the year ended March 2019.
     
    The well-known Sintex tank is part of a separate company Sintex Plastics which came into existence through a demerger from Sintex Industries in August 2017.  Sintex Plastics is also into custom moulding and prefab business.

     

  • Like this story? Get our top stories by email.

    User

    COMMENTS

    Srisaisarantraders

    4 weeks ago

    What is the present financial situation in sintex?.we heard many bad roumers about this company...

    Ramesh Poapt

    2 months ago

    Sintex plastic is also in bad shape! The co. is in the list of money laundering
    overseas, perhaps 48 cr.

    Chandragupta Acharya

    2 months ago

    Borrowing of Rs.5300 crore and quarterly turnover of less than Rs.600 crore? What did they do with the money?

    Gaurav Dalal

    2 months ago

    Good

    SFIO Suspects RBI Top Official’s Collusion with IL&FS
    In a recent addition to the Infrastructure Leasing and Financing Services (IL&FS) crisis, the Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) suspects that a senior official from the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) may have had some role to play in turning a blind eye to the non-compliance with various inspection report findings, says a report in the Time of India.
     
    The SFIO has asked the central bank to conduct an internal investigation to find out why there was no action against IL&FS for ignoring RBI's directions in connection with its inspection reports. The report suggests that Ramesh C Bawa, CEO (chief executive officer) of IL&FS Financial Services (IFIN) allegedly had some links with a senior official from RBI, although there has been no evidence of quid pro quo on part of the RBI official. 
     
    The RBI inspection of 2015 had raised several issues with IFIN but no action was taken until 2017 and it was given time until 2019 for certain compliances—but IL&FS’s parent company itself started defaulting on its obligations in 2018. 
     
    This background is interesting because the RBI has been steadily stonewalling Right to Information (RTI) queries from Moneylife as well as others activists with regard to IL&FS. 
     
    One of the RTIs filed with them was concerning details and information of the officers at the RBI who were responsible for monitoring IL&FS. The RBI however, refused to give us the information saying that revealing such information could pose a risk to the officers’ life.
     
    We had also filed another RTI with RBI asking them for copies of annual inspection report conducted by the RBI concerning IL&FS for the past three years. The public information officer (PIO) of the RBI refused to give the information. The PIO, in his response observed, “The Central government has ordered investigation into the affairs of the IL&FS Ltd and therefore requested for the inspection reports relating to the company. As investigation into the affairs of the company is still pending with the SFIO, the information sought is exempted from disclosure under sub clause (h) of sub-section (1) of Section 8 of the Right to Information Act, 2005.”
     
    The PIO also refused to give the information regarding IL&FS inspection report quoting Section 45NB of the RBI Act, 1934. This refusal to give information quoting Section 45NB of the RBI Act is both illegal and wrong. 
     
    Information can only be denied under Section 8 or Section 9 of the RTI Act. Further to that, the RTI Act categorically states that as far as dispersal of information is concerned, the RTI Act takes precedence over every other existing act and this includes the Official Secrets Act. The Act reads, “The provisions of this Act shall have effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in the Official Secrets Act, 1923 (19 of 1923), and any other law for the time being in force or in any instrument having effect by virtue of any law other than this Act.”
     
    As far as denial of information under Section 8(i)(h) is concerned, it states that information which would impede the process of investigation cannot be given, the operative word being impede which effectively means that the PIO refusing information using this clause has to therefore show how it would impede. In case they cannot show how that will happen, information has to given. 
     
    Given how the information was refused illegally, we filed a first appeal. The first appellate authority (FAA) of the RBI again upheld the decision of the PIO observing that,” As regards the appellant's request of providing him with the copies of the annual inspection report conducted by RBI pertaining to IL&FS, I agree with the CPIO that the said request for information of the appellant cannot be acceded to.”
     
    The FAA further observed, “As Section 45NB of the RBI Act deals with specific information relating to the NBFCs, the said provision cannot consider to be over-ridden by the provisions of  the Right to Information Act which is a general legislation dealing with every kind of information.” This decision of the FAA is blatantly in violation of the RTI Act’s rules. 
     
    The FAA also upheld the PIO’s decision to not reveal information using Section 8(i)(h) even though no just reasoning was provided as to how revealing such information would impede the process. 
  • Like this story? Get our top stories by email.

    User

    COMMENTS

    Srisaisarantraders

    2 weeks ago

    Alert me when a new comments is posted

    Ramesh Jaradhara

    2 months ago

    In my opinion, in such cases, you shall make an appeal to the Central Information Commission for providing information which was not given out by RBI, citing improper provisions of RTI Act. The slack attitude of RBI induce many FIs/NBFCs to indulge in illegal activities causing huge losses of public money.

    Ramchandra Karve

    2 months ago

    With the passage of time amendments need to be carried out to the RTI Act 2005. The exemptions Certain clauses of the RTI Act which exempt a body from provide certain information besides defeating the purpose for which said Act was introduced, also encourage organisations to indulge in malpractices. Ramchandra Karve retired RBI officer and RTI activist

    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

    online financial advisory
    Pathbreakers
    Pathbreakers 1 & Pathbreakers 2 contain deep insights, unknown facts and captivating events in the life of 51 top achievers, in their own words.
    online financia advisory
    The Scam
    24 Year Of The Scam: The Perennial Bestseller, reads like a Thriller!
    Moneylife Online Magazine
    Fiercely independent and pro-consumer information on personal finance
    financial magazines online
    Stockletters in 3 Flavours
    Outstanding research that beats mutual funds year after year
    financial magazines in india
    MAS: Complete Online Financial Advisory
    (Includes Moneylife Online Magazine)