|
|
|
|
Offered Rs 14K cr to banks as settlement: Mallya's UB tells SC
|
|
|
|
| Top Stories |
 |
|
|
|
SME Times News Bureau | 30 Sep, 2020
Fugitive liquor baron Vijay Mallya's United Breweries (Holding) Ltd on
Wednesday told the Supreme Court that it had offered over Rs 14,000
crore to various banks to settle its dues and that the company's assets
exceeded its total debt.
Senior advocate C.S. Vaidyanathan,
appearing for United Breweries, submitted before a bench comprising
Justices U.U. Lalit, Vineet Saran and S. Ravindra Bhat that the response
of the banks had been received.
He contended that since the
company's assets exceeded the total debt, it was not the case wherein
the company should be directed to wind up.
He insisted that the
Enforcement Directorate (ED) had attached many assets of the company, as
a result of which none was available to the banks.
"The total
amount offered is over Rs 14,000 crore whereas the total due amount is
Rs 6,203 crore plus interest. But the allocation has been only Rs 430
crore," Vaidyanathan contended.
He added that not a single attached property had been actually attached by the ED since 2009.
Vaidyanathan said that the petitioner was the guarantor though the loans were taken by Kingfisher and others.
The
submissions were made during hearing of United Breweries' plea to
challenge the Karnataka High Court order to uphold the winding-up of the
company.
The counsel submitted that not a single asset had been
acquired since 2009 when bank loans were allegedly siphoned off
overseas. In response, Justice Lalit queried: "Has the attachment order
been challenged?"
The counsel said that an appeal was filed in
the Prevention of Money Laundering Act Tribunal, adding that they were
told that the attachment order was for satisfying debts and the bulk of
assets were in the form of shares.
He argued that the PMLA probe
revealed that a major part of the total money sanctioned by the IDBI
Bank was remitted outside India, and used for payments for aircraft and
spare parts.
The investigation concluded that IDBI loans were
not backed by marketable commodities, while orders for provisional
attachment were passed on the ground of involvement in money-laundering,
Vaidyanathan said.
Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing the State Bank of India, submitted that the appeal was devoid of merits.
In
the last hearing, the apex court had queried whether a company's
attached assets could be considered for liquidation for the settlement
of debt. The bench will hear the matter on Thursday.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Customs Exchange Rates |
| Currency |
Import |
Export |
US Dollar
|
₹95.3
|
₹93.6 |
UK Pound
|
₹127.7
|
₹123.7 |
Euro
|
₹110.65
|
₹106.9 |
| Japanese
Yen |
₹59.75 |
₹57.9 |
| As on 24 Jun, 2026 |
|
|
| Daily Poll |
 |
 |
| What’s your biggest challenge with the 45-day payment rule? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Commented Stories |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
