SME Times is powered by   
Search News
Just in:   • India needs to diversify export portfolio: Report  • Domestic airlines to fly 12,983 flights per week this winter  • New energy policy won't violate deals with US, Canada: Mexican Prez  • 'Digitisation need of the hour for logistics sector'  • KTR calls for empowering states to boost country's growth 
Last updated: 30 Sep, 2020  

Vijay.9.Thmb.jpg Offered Rs 14K cr to banks as settlement: Mallya's UB tells SC

vijay-mallya160603.jpg
   Top Stories
» India needs to diversify export portfolio: Report
» 'Digitisation need of the hour for logistics sector'
» 'IBC raised confidence of all investors in economy'
» Relief to borrowers on loans not repaid during 6-month moratorium
» GST return filing deadline extended, again
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.
 
Print the Page
Add to Favorite
 
Share this on :
 

Please comment on this story:
 
Subject :
Message:
(Maximum 1500 characters)  Characters left 1500
Your name:
 

 
  Customs Exchange Rates
Currency Import Export
US Dollar
66.20
64.50
UK Pound
87.50
84.65
Euro
78.25
75.65
Japanese Yen 58.85 56.85
As on 26 Oct, 2020
  Daily Poll
COVID-19 has directly affected your business
 Yes
 No
 Can't say
  Commented Stories
» 'Centre open to further economic stimulus'(1)
» Delay in dealing with GST refund delays(1)
» NPAs hurdle to banks' rate cut transmission(1)
 
 
About Us  |   Advertise with Us  
  Useful Links  |   Terms and Conditions  |   Disclaimer  |   Contact Us  
Follow Us : Facebook Twitter