top of page
Aug 8, 202110 min read

A Brief Situational Analysis of the DHFL Scam: Proposed Remedies

Posted on 08/08/2021

Last Updated on 27/02/2022

Dear DHFL Scam victims,

I have some general questions to you along with answer-clues. Try to understand the questions and please contemplate on the answers.

Question. Who is/are responsible for your miseries related to the DHFL? Who is your opponent(s)?

Answer-clues:

B) Associate (A) with disproportionate increase of assets of the ruling party, cf. CONSEQUENCES OF CRONY AND MONOPOLY CAPITALISM IN INDIA: THE CASE OF DHFL SCAM VIEW HERE ⤡;

C) Clashes or incommensurabilities among the IBC, NHB Act, Company Act and RBI Act;

D) The non-diligent auditing by the COC for DHFL, who are predetermined to hand DHFL over to a business tycoon (Pl. See point 14 of this document: A WHITE PAPER ON THE DEWAN HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION LTD. (DHFL) VIEW HERE ⤡)

E) Ramshackled judiciary

F) Failure of rating agencies

G) DHFL Brand Ambassador Mr. Shah Rukh Khan

H) Despite being sub judice, Mr. Ajay Piramal is forcefully occupying the DHFL. It is to be noted that we have proved many times in this blog that Piramal is getting a free gift of astronomical figure of assets from the DHFL by paying a penny and by depriving the small investors.

I) The legal sanctity of the DHFL-COC has already been questioned by the 63 Moons, and the first order of NCLT [Download NCLT ORDER ON DHFL-COC], which was rejected/nullified without any arguments by the NCLAT. This is simply “Error in jurisdiction vs. Excessive Jurisdiction” VIEW HERE ⤡ (As reported on 17th July, 2020 ©Law Street India).

J) Me and/or my agent

K) None of the above

If you are able to identify your opponents, please find out their all the weaknesses and attack all-out by the below-mentioned remedies. You may find a ‘rainbow of hopes’ as your opponent is already on the back foot due to several anti-people scams.

REMEDIES

A) Filing a case at the Supreme Court. [Please note that the legal matter is being superseded by the political will of the ruling party due to terror-funding, e.g., Jharkhand judge death: SC pulls up CBI for not responding to judges’ complaints, issues notice VIEW HERE ⤡ (As reported on 6th August, 2021©India Today) Supreme Court swings into action after Jharkhand judge’s death. VIEW HERE ⤡ (As reported on 29th July, 2021 ©The Hindu)].

B) Using the web platforms (in the time of pandemic, you have to maintain physical distance) you can initiate non-violent civil disobedience movement.

C) Filing a Petition at the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) for the violation of the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights ⤡ in this context, “Access to remedy for victims of business-related abuses”.

POSITIVE POINTS

A) The former promoter is willing to pay the full amount to the small investors. He has already filed a case at the Supreme Court of India.

Bankruptcy will not void personal guarantees: Supreme Court VIEW HERE ⤡(As reported on 25thMay, 2021©The Times of India)

immediately after the Parliamentary Standing Committee’s report the the corporate affairs ministry is working with the finance ministry, RBI and the Indian Banks’ Association on the conduct of the committee of creditors (CoC) under the insolvency resolution process.

IBC: Govt. working with RBI on CoC’s conduct VIEW HERE ⤡ (As reported on 27th August ©The Hindu, PTI)

B) After Stan Swamy’s institutional murder, all the Catholic and Jesuit investors are more aggrieved. They have also filed case at the High Court regarding DHFL scam.

C) The Air Force of India, though (to be) paid fully, voted negatively against the COC for the sake of the multitude of FD Holders.

D) Moreover, there are lots of confusion regarding the Supreme Court’s role on the IBC. The recent verdict (15th September, 2021) and its interpretations are given below. The heading of the news (along with the verdict) speaks itself about the situation:

E) On 27/01/2022, the NCLAT ordered the DHFL-CoC to consider 63 moon’s plea and reconsider its resolution plan in favour of Piramal accordingly. The 63 Moons has made its appeal on the basis of Section 66⤡ of the IBC, which, according to the 63 Moons, provides for the “benefit of all the creditors” in the long run. However, this provision was overlooked by the DHFL-CoC due to its fraudulent state of affairs. With this NCLAT order, DHFL Administrator R. Subramaniakumar and Public Depositors’ Representative Charu Sandeep Desai are seriously at stake! The Conduct of the CoC (in general) has also been questioned by the Standing Committee of the Parliament as well.

NCLAT asks CoC to consider 63 moons’ plea in DHFL Resolution Plan VIEW HERE ⤡ (As reported on 27th January, 2022 ©The Times of India)


Furthermore, on 27th January, 2022, the NCLAT pointed out that:

“The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) set aside the order of the National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai, which directed the administrator of Dewan Housing Finance Corporation Ltd. (DHFL) to place the second settlement proposal sent by Kapil Wadhawan before the Committee of Creditors (CoC).

The order came on a batch of petitions filed by Union Bank of India (on behalf of the CoC), DHFL’s administrator and Piramal Capital & Housing Finance (successful resolution applicant) challenging NCLT’s order.

While setting aside the NCLT order, a Bench of judicial member M Venugopal and technical members VP Singh and Dr Ashok Kumar Mishra held that “the said exercise was beyond the jurisdiction of the Adjudicating Authority (NCLT) hence unsustainable and liable to be set aside”.

It observed that the directions passed by NCLT came despite the fact that CoC already approved the resolution plan submitted by DHFL by an overwhelming majority and the plan approval application filed by the administrator had been reserved for orders by the Adjudicating Authority.“

Certain relevant portions from the said judgment, highlighting the basal “illegality” of the DHFL-CoC and its approved Resolution Plan are cited as follows:

The NCLAT Judgment, passed on 27/01/2022, is being provided as follows in PDF:

#—————————————————————-#

A DIALOGUE BETWEEN ACTIVE AND PASSIVE WORKERS:

Person X: Do you want to participate in the legal battle against this type of financial abuse?

Person Y: No. I have become a pauper. I cannot afford the expenses of the Supreme Court.

Person X: Well, can you participate in digital non-violent civil disobedience movement?

Person Y: I am not a tech-savvy person. If I do that, Government will arrest me. I am way too scared.

Person X: So what can you do?

Person Y: I can commit suicide or I can take psychiatric drugs to decrease my anxiety disorders or I can sleep lazily since I think that the welfare-state will take a judicious decision to solve all my miseries. Therefore, I am doing nothing.

Dr. Debaprasad Bandyopadhyay

Mrs. Rupa Bandyopadhyay

Mr. Akhar Bandyopadhyay

8th August, 2021

(Remembering Nagasaki Day nuclear attack (at 11:02 am, August 9, 1945)

FURTHER ANALYSIS:

Question raised by anonymous DHFL Victim:

—> After the upcoming NCLAT Order on 16th September, 2021, will DHFL FD Holders start getting their disbursement as per the accepted RP involving major haircut?

Ans: It is very difficult to answer the question under the whimdom of the crony autocratic government. We need to correlate the following facts:

1. The DHFL Case is still sub judice (PENDING ADJUDICATION)

2. First NCLT order has revealed everything about the scam of the CoC, but the CoC with severe audacity has skipped that without answering NCLT’s pertinent questions; (this rejected first order of NCLT is our greatest legal weapon to thrash the RBI-appointed CoC for DHFL);

3. The CoC for DHFL took a great leap (as reverse merger of the ongoing profitable company to a non-listed company is predetermined by the crony ruling party: invisible governance of the deep state) to take its recourse to higher tribunal. This step is fully illegal.

4. Moreover, the Standing Committee of the parliament has already questioned ⤡ the legitimacy of repeatedly amended IBC 2016. These repeated amendments within last 4/5 years entail the inconsistencies embedded in the newly-born code, the escape route for the business tycoons;

According to CA Deepak Chamaria,

“There was no requirement of IBC act. Already all the act in itself have the liquidation / winding up procedures.These COC appointment and their fees are extra burden and surprisingly more secured than rest creditors. Regulatory people are already paid for this why not they do it.”

4. The SC has already stated in its order that bankruptcy will not void personal guarantees of the old promoter. Moreover, NCLAT recently order has stated that a company can run as a “going concern” after liquidation;

Bankruptcy will not void personal guarantees: Supreme Court VIEW HERE ⤡ (As reported on 22nd May, 2021 ©The Times of India)

[NB: When the RP of Piramal for #DHFL was accepted, the cash surplus of the DHFL was 11K Crs. Now the cash surplus is 19K crores.]

5. In the meantime,Mr. Kapil Wadhawan, with the help of the wisdom of Kapil Sibal’s advocacy has appealed to the NCLAT & the SC. The old promoter is ready to pay us the full amount. (cf. Point 4).

The point is to be noted here that Mr. Kapil Wadhawan is not arrested for alleged money laundering/siphoning of money/fund diversion by the DHFL, rather he is arrested for Yes Bank Case. Vigilant agencies have not lodged cases against the Company so far, i.e., the allegations are still to be empirically proved. The mystery of siphoning of Rs 20,000 crore is correlated with the figure of amount allegedly donated (political charity/political donation or otherwise alleged terror funding⤡.) to the ruling party.

The India Congress Party alleged that . Gift BJP Rs 20 cr, get ‘return gift’ worth Rs 31K cr: Congress on fraud by DHFL VIEW HERE ⤡ (As reported on 30 January, 2019, ©Millennium Post). May we believe Congress’ allegation?

Moreover, the alleged fund diversion also proves the failure of much proclaimed demonetization process [we have already mentioned it in our white paper⤡ on 19/06/2021].

6. Along with this almost 15+ Institutes (including Catholic institutes, who are much more aggrieved after the sad “custodial murder” of Stan Swamy clubbed with religious extremism of the present ruling party. There is also a tremendous pressure on the crony government from the Vatican City [the present Pope uses socialist jibes & he is agaist neo-liberal capitalist economy] & the UN, especially the OHCHR, our ultimate recourse.) have appealed to the HC & the SC. (Get back to point 1).

7. Piramal’s RP is going to get expired on 5th or 7th sep 2021 (within 90 days of the approval of the RP). According to CA Deepak Chamaria,

“RP consists of repayment schedule. And this failure can be construed as breach of contract. And may be further argued as his inability to buy out DHFL.”

8. The collapsed judiciary is reviving under the Hon. CJI Nuthalapati Venkata Ramana. The apex court under his guidance has taken its own initiatives to lodge suo moto cognizance in three consecutive cases (including scrapping of the colonial sedition law) within one or two months:

Hope for the best. Keep your pressure on the crony government/terror funded ruling party through the web platforms as political will is much more important than legal will to solve our case.

The CJI clearly pointed out that they cannot work under tremendous political pressure.


Institutional need to create a safe environment for judicial officers: SC

ADDENDA:

After the forceful, impulsive and illegal disbursement of 23% of the principal amount to the DHFL FD Holders by Mr. Ajay Piramal on 29th-30th September, 2021:

Father of a damad of a favoured business tycoon?

A savage capitalist?

A non-entity, non-MNC, whose company is not even listed?

1. Piramal, though the so-called “successful bidder” according to lowest quasi-judicial body+ the RBI-appointed CoC & a father of a damad of a business tycoon, preferred by the ruling party (bribing? Political charity? Terror funding?), Piramal is forcefully performing illegal activities despite pending sub judice cases.

2. The de facto “owner” (?self-proclaimed?) of the DHFL is also part of our case as they are also mentioned as the respondents. His “claim” as an owner of the DHFL binds him to be a party in our case.

Kindly note that the recent SC judgement regarding validity of invoking personal guarantees of promoters in IBC. We are emphasizing on this verdict: Bankruptcy will not void personal guarantees: Supreme Court (As reported on May 22, 2021 ©The Times of India)

3. The greatest mistake he had done was that, when the RBI-appointed CoC approached the NCLAT, the lower quasi judicial body, he, a non-entity, accompanied the CoC & the Union Bank of India without answering the legitimate questions raised by the NCLT (lowest quasi judicial body) first order (our weapon–in 84 page-verdict, everything was revealed) that was rejected without any arguments. That is clearly an instance of the “contempt of the court”.


Hence, this is possible only within the realm of a thoroughly plutocratic regime run by the cronies. Resist that regime by non-violent all-out-attack along with the judicial means!

Comments

bottom of page