Posted on 12/03/2023 (IST 23:58 hrs)
Updated on 18/03/2023 (IST 12:40 hrs)
Here are some posters on the DHFL scam that throw light on its ambiguities, ambivalences, contradictions, irregularities, illegalities, void spaces and above all, the tale of politically motivated transformation of an ongoing, solvent, profitable company to an insolvent, bankrupt company.
Though the former owners of the DHFL donated (as far as we know) 28+ crores to the ruling party of India, i.e., BJP, for their survival, yet they were blow off by the governmentality of the ruling government.
AN URGENT APPEAL
These posters should be liked, commented on, shared and reblogged in order to reach the victims to this unprecedented disaster in all Indian history.
Mr. Ajay Piramal, an alleged insider trader, committed contempt of court (There are broadly two categories of contempt of court: being disrespectful to legal authorities in the courtroom, or willfully failing to obey a court order) in the DHFL Case on two occasions: (a) ignoring NCLT First order (19/05/2021) for reconsidering Mr. Wadhawan’s full repayment plan and (b) not reconsidering the resolution plan itself as per the NCLAT Second order (27/01/2022). It is only possible in the regime of autocrats. They are trying to appropriate the functions of the judiciary by poking their nose in the Collegium System, making death threat to the judges etc. Is it a crony-autocracy?
Conclusion
Piramal’s ownership claim is based solely on the NCLT’s approval order (07/06/2021), though Piramal totally ignored the NCLT First Order (19/05/2021) by not answering the pertinent questions asked by the latter within the stipulated time period. It seems that the approval order is somewhat forced on the part of the NCLT. It is paradoxical enough that the same lowest quasi-judicial body’s two verdicts were once neglected (19/05/2021) and then accepted (07/06/2021) by the Piramal CHF (aka Piramal Finance), though NCLT is considered as the highest Adjudicating Authority under the IBC (2016). Why did they act like an equivocator?
Because, NCLT and NCLAT are perfectly aware of their limitation (“Error in jurisdiction vs. Excessive Jurisdiction” VIEW HERE ⤡ As reported on 17th July, 2020 ©Law Street India) as the lowest and lower quasi-judicial bodies.
However, both these quasi-judicial bodies had perfectly pointed out the irregularities/illegalities of the RP as presented by the Piramal CHF. Here are some excerpts from the NCLT RE-ORDER, 07/06/2021 (pp. 75-77) on the basis of which, (it is strange enough) Mr. Piramal has occupied the DHFL. The following discourse is a living instance of our claim that Mr. Piramal forcibly trespassed the threshold of the DHFL.
“With regard to the claims of more than 70,000 Fixed Deposit Holders, Lakhs of Employees of UP State Power Sector Employees Trust, Board of Trustees of UP Power Corporation Contributory Provident Fund Trust, investment by Capgemini Business Services India Ltd, Employees Provident Fund Trust, other claimants falling in the similar category, We have heard the arguments from both the sides at length and we are of the considered view that considering the number of small investors running into lakhs, senior citizens, who had deposited their hard earned savings, have to meet various expenses especially in this Covid 19 Pandemic situation, loss of jobs to number of depositors, to meet other essential needs the employees of the PF Trust which is the money they would get at the time of , after superannuation. Therefore, we are of the considered view that they should get a fair, increased share money out of the Resolution Plan. Since FSP is a different nature of company than a normal Corporate Debtor, where in thousands, Lakhs of Small Investors invest their funds for a reasonable interest income to take care of their needs. Its generally considered that investment in Fixed Deposit, NCDs are low risk investment than investing in Equity Shares therefore these small investors should not be put to more risk, take more hair cut than the stronger financial institutions viz Banks, Financial Institutions and accordingly for this limited purpose we direct the COC to reconsider their distribution method, distribution amongst various members of CoC within two weeks from today and report the same to this Adjudicating Authority.” “With regard to the decision on distribution to this public depositors, Fixed Deposit holders, subscribers to NCDs we also suggest, request the COC to reconsider their grievances, plights and they did not oppose the resolution plan and their request is only to enhance the percentage of payment made in the plan and the same should be increased to the level of Secured Financial Creditors i.e. approximately 40% the Financial Creditors would be getting in this plan. We further make it clear that there is no additional monetary obligation for the Successful Resolution Applicant to pay anything more than what it has committed in the Resolution Plan i.e an amount of Rs. 37,250 Crores. It is only an inter se distribution of resolution money amongst various creditors. Therefore, with regard to the manner of distribution, the method of distribution between various creditors viz Public Depositors, Fixed Deposit Holders, NCD Holders, Small Investors, Employees Provident Fund Trust, Army Group Insurance Fund etc we request, suggest the CoC to reconsider the same so that lakhs of small investors would be benefited.” “Further ARMY Group, did not challenge, oppose the plan, only seeking a sympathetic view of CoC, Resolution Applicant thereby thousands of families, widows, children can be saved. Their investment can be treated as a separate class, subclass of creditors. Hon’ble NCLAT vide order dated 19.09.2020 already treated it as a separate class. Therefore, we suggest that since the total resolution plan amount is Rs. 37,250 Crores the admitted claim of the Army Group Insurance Fund is only Rs.39 Crores which is 0.0001% of the total plan amount therefore we suggest the CoC to reconsider and pay the full admitted claim amount of Rs.39 Crores considering the nature of duties performed by them who are protecting the Nation, sacrificing their lives, difficult working conditions and human service to keep peace of the country it would be appropriate for the members of the CoC to reconsider and to repay their entire admitted claim without any hair cut thereby expressing our deep concern, gratitude and respect to the Army Personnel. Further Ld. Counsel appearing for the Army Group submitted that no insurance Company is extending insurance to Army personnel so it’s a scheme devised by them with the approval of the Govt., Ministry of Defence and their deduction is made from their monthly salary and applicable to all the rank of employees i.e from bottom to top.” NCLT RE-ORDER, 07/06/2021 (pp. 75-77) nclt-re-order Download NCLT RE-ORDER
As the NCLAT says in its second order (27/01/2022) that it is beyond their purview to challenge the RBI-appointed CoC’s approved RP, they are pointing out the lacuna and loopholes of the RP in their “Analysis” and “Order” sections of the verdict.
Both the NCLT first order and NCLAT second order are eye-openers for this particular scam committed by the RBI-appointed CoC for DHFL and Mr. Piramal.
So, the complexities of the legal matters are proliferated due to the predetermined, biased, prejudiced (cf. NCLT First order, page no. 10; NCLAT Second order, page no. 5, page no. 51) mindset of the RBI-appointed CoC for DHFL.
to be continued…
See Also:
Comments