Back
2018 Supreme(SC) 1687
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
DIPAK MISRA, CJI., RANJAN GOGOI, A.K. SIKRI, JJ.
Securities and Exchange Board of India – Petitioner
Versus
Subrata Roy Sahara and Others – Respondents
CONMT. PET. (C) Nos. 1820-1822 of 2017, 412, 413 of 2012, 260 of 2013, C.A. Nos. 8643 of 2012, 9813, 9833 of 2011
Decided On : 12-07-2018
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Mr. Shekhar Naphade, Ms. Shubhangi Tuli, Mr. Vikram Sobti, Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Ms. Surekha Raman, Mr. Purushottam Kumar Jha, Mr. Anuj Sarma, Ms. Niharika, Ms. Kanika Kalaiyarasan, M/s. K.J. John, Mr. Danius Khambatta, Mr. C.S. Vaidyanathan, Mr. Rashmikant, Mr. Aniruddha P. Mayee, Mr. Chirag Jain.
For the Respondents: Mr. Vikas Singh, Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Ms. Deepika, Mr. Varun Singh, Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Mr. Vijay Kumar, Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav, Mr. Devanshu Yadav, Ms. Mahima Deepak, Mr. S. Venkatesh, Mr. Aditya Gupta, Ms. Alya Khan, Mr. Vivek Vashi, Mr. Biswajit Bhattacharya, Mr. Pawan Upadhyay, Mr. Sarvjit Pratap Singh, Mr. Vishnu Sharma, Ms. Anupama Sharma, Ms. Sonali Negi, Mr. Mohit Rai, Mr. Akhileshwar Jha, Mr. D.L. Chidananda, Ms. Sadhana Sandhu, Ms. Anil Katiyar, Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, Ms. Manisha, Ms. Swati Setia, Mr. Ramesh Babu M.R.
The Court has the authority to issue specific orders and deadlines for compliance in ongoing legal proceedings.
Headnote:
Court Order - Aamby Valley City - The court issued orders related to the auction of properties, negotiation with companies, deposit of agreed amounts, maintenance activities, and discharge of Receiver and Official Liquidator.
Fact of the Case:
The Court issued orders related to the auction of properties, negotiation with companies, deposit of agreed amounts, maintenance activities, and discharge of Receiver and Official Liquidator.
Finding of the Court:
The Court made various orders related to the ongoing legal proceedings, including the negotiation with companies, deposit of agreed amounts, maintenance activities, and discharge of Receiver and Official Liquidator.
Issues: Auction of properties, negotiation with companies, deposit of agreed amounts, maintenance activities, discharge of Receiver and Official Liquidator.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court's decision was based on the latest report submitted by the Court Receiver and the Official Liquidator, as well as the submissions made by the counsels representing the parties involved.
Final Decision: The Court issued specific orders related to the auction of properties, negotiation with companies, deposit of agreed amounts, maintenance activities, and discharge of Receiver and Official Liquidator, with clear instructions and deadlines for compliance.
ORDER :
1. On a perusal of the latest Report submitted by the Court Receiver as well as the Official Liquidator, the High Court of Bombay, it is noticeable that the properties situated in Aamby Valley City are not in a position to be auctioned because there has been no response with regard to the notice inviting tender.
2. At this juncture, Mr. Vikas Singh, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent-contemnor submitted that it has entered into negotiation with M/s. Sai Rydam Realtors Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Prime Downtown Estates Pvt. Ltd. Mr. Paras Kuhad, learned senior counsel represents the said companies.
3. In the course of hearing it has been accepted by Mr. Kuhad that a Demand Draft amounting to Rs. 99 crores has been handed over to Mr. Pratap Venugopal, learned counsel assisting Mr. Arvind P. Datar, learned senior counsel appearing for SEBI. Be it noted, the agreed amount is Rs. 982.80 crores. He further submits that a sum of Rs. 200 crores shall be deposited in the SEBI-Sahara Refund Account on or before 24.07.2018 and another sum of Rs. 200 crores shall be deposited on or before 16.08.2018. The balance amount shall be deposited on or before 12.09.2018. Needless to say, the TDS and other applicable taxes can be deducted as per rules.
4. Be it clarified that if the abovementioned companies violate the time limit indicated above, they shall be liable for contempt of this Court and this Court may think of sending all the Directors to jail. Needless to say, the amount deposited shall be forfeited. Once we have directed for transaction to take place, no one shall create any obstruction in the same.
5. As far as maintenance is concerned it is submitted by Mr. Singh that the revenue generating activities should be allowed. Mr. Khambatta and Mr. Vaidyanathan, learned senior counsel appearing for the Official Liquidator/Court Receiver have no objection to this request. Needless to say, the said activities shall be carried on subject to furnishing of account and fixation of royalty to the Receiver. The account shall be furnished within two weeks.
6. At this stage, another aspect needs to be noted. We have been apprised by Mr. Datar that a hotel by the name ‘Plaza Hotel’ in New York has already been sold. The respondent-contemnor shall file an affidavit explaining the basis for the said sale and as to how the sale proceeds have been utilised.
7. In view of the obtaining fact situation, the Receiver and the Official Liquidator are discharged. It is, however, made clear that they shall be discharged after the furnishing of account, as noted above.
8. SEBI is permitted to replenish the expenses made by it. SEBI shall also pay the expenses incurred by the Receiver as well as the Liquidator. Needless to say, the account of the same shall be furnished to the contemnor.
9. Let the matter be listed at 02:00 p.m. on 14.09.2018.
