CONMT.PET.(C) NO. 1820-1822/2017 ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CONMT.PET.(C) NO. 1820-1822/2017 IN CONMT.PET.(C) NO. 413/2012 IN C.A. NO. 9833/2011 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA PETITIONER(S) VERSUS SUBRATA ROY SAHARA AND ORS. & ORS. RESPONDENT(S) [ONLY I.A. NOS. 63099/2025, 74972/2025, 74974/2025, 165933/2025, 165935/2025 IN CONMT. PET (C) NO. 1820-1822/2017 AND I.A. NOS. 232665/2025, 233167/2025, 232892/2025, IA. NO. 4271/2025, 182815/2024, 260221/2025, 260224/2025, 260233/2025, 260226/2025, 257933/2025, 257934/2025, 260259/2025, 258194/2025, 258195/2025, 58639/2025, 58641/2025, 103083/2025, 103084/2025, 103086/2025, 131753/2025, 131754/2025, IN CONMT PET (C) NO. 412/2012 AND I.A. NO. 23883/2024 IN CIVIL APPEAL No. 7152-7153 of 2016 ARE LISTED UNDER THIS ITEM]...........................................................… Mr. Shekhar Naphade, Sr. Advocate (Amicus Curie) Ms. Fauzia Shakil, AOR IA No. 260259/2025 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 103086/2025 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 258195/2025 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 74974/2025 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 63099/2025 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 58641/2025 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 165935/2025 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 103084/2025 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 257934/2025 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 58639/2025 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 258194/2025 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 103083/2025 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 257933/2025 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 74972/2025 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 165933/2025 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 131754/2025 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 131753/2025 - PERMISSION TO FILE APPLICATION FOR DIRECTION WITH 1
CONMT.PET.(C) NO. 1820-1822/2017 CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 (XVII) IA No. 260226/2025 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 260224/2025 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 232892/2025 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 232665/2025 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 260233/2025 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 260221/2025 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 233167/2025 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 4271/2025 - MODIFICATION IA No. 182815/2024 - MODIFICATION OF COURT ORDER C.A. No. 7152-7153/2016 (XVII-A) FOR APPLICATION FOR SETTLEMENT ON IA 23883/2024 IA No. 23883/2024 - APPLICATION FOR SETTLEMENT Date : 17-11-2025 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. SUNDRESH AMICUS CURIAE: Mr. Shekhar Naphade, Sr. Advocate (AC) Ms. Fauzia Shakil, AOR Ms. Salonee Paranjape, Adv. Ms. Tasmiya Taleha, Adv. For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Arvind P Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Sr. Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Shreyash Kumar, Adv. Mr. Yashwant Sanjenbam, Adv. Mr. Sidharth Nair, Adv. Mr. Harshit Singh, Adv. Mr. Siddhartha N, Adv. M/S. K J John And Co, AOR Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, AOR For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rohan Thawani, Adv. Ms. Pooja Dhar, AOR Ms. S. Ambica, Adv. 2
CONMT.PET.(C) NO. 1820-1822/2017 Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Mr. Balbir Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Mr. B.M. Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Devanshu Yadav, Adv. Mr. Sameer Pandey, Adv. Mr. Sahil Sharma, Adv. Mr. Rishabh Parikh, Adv. Mr. Parijat Mishra, Adv. Ms. Chandni Sharma, Adv. Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Mr. Suryakant Singla, Sr. Adv. Ms. Supriya Juneja, AOR Ms. Arya Suresh, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv. Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR Mr. Shrirang B. Varma, Adv. Mr. Bharat Bagla, Adv. Mr. Sourav Singh, Adv. Mr. Aditya Krishna, Adv. Mr. Adarsh Dubey, Adv. Mrs. Pragya Baghel, AOR Mr. Narender Kumar Verma, AOR Mr. Ashish Raghuvanshi, Adv. Ms. C. Ankeeta Appanna, AOR Ms. Madhura Chitnis, Adv. Mr. Bhomesh Bellam, Adv. Mr. Ishit Mahajan, Adv. Ms. Tanya Agarwal, AOR Mr. Kamlesh Kumar Mishra, Adv. Ms. Renu, Adv. Ms. Swagata Gupta, Adv. Ms. Shivani Verma, Adv. Mr. Piyush Kumar singh, Adv. Ms. Mansi, Adv. Mr. Md. Qayamuddin, AOR Ms. Anuradha Mutatkar, AOR 3
CONMT.PET.(C) NO. 1820-1822/2017 Mr. Arjun Garg, AOR Ms. Sagun Srivastava, Adv. Mr. Saaransh Shukla, Adv. Ms. Muskan Bensla, Adv. Mr. Vibhav Srivastava, Adv. Mrs. Priya Puri, AOR Mr. Sachin Dubey, Adv. Mr. Sharad Kumar Puri, Adv. Ms. Pinki Aggarwal, Adv. Ms. Riya Dogra, Adv. Ms. Ashita Arora, Adv. Mr. Swetank Shantanu, AOR Mr. Gyanant Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Abhishek Rai, Adv. Mr. Sarthak Shankar, Adv. Mr. Pratap Shanker, Adv. Mr. Divakar Kumar, AOR Mr. Sanjay Bhaseen, Sr. Adv. Ms. Ishita Bhaseen, Adv. Mr. Sarvesh Kumar Debey, Adv. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Verma, Adv. Mr. T.S. Nanda Kumar, AOR Mr. Abhinay, AOR Mrs. S. Lakshmi Iyer, Adv. Ms. Deeksha Prakash, Adv. Ms. Parul Khurana, Adv. Ms. Liz Mathew, Sr. Adv. Mr. Navneet R., AOR Mr. Rishab Khare, Adv. Mr. Omkar Hemanth, Adv. Ms. Alankrita Sinha, Adv. Mr. C. George Thomas, AOR Mr. B S Rajesh Agrajit, Adv. Ms. Siddharth Goswami, Adv. Ms. Somya Chouhan, Adv. Mr. Sachin Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Vivekanand Singh, Adv. 4
CONMT.PET.(C) NO. 1820-1822/2017 Mr. Naunihal Yadav, Adv. Ms. Shambhavi Jaiswal, Adv. Mr. Gladson Salvador Rodrigues, Adv. Mr. Satya Veer Singh, AOR Mr. Sandeep Sudhakar Deshmukh, AOR Mr. Nishant Sharma, Adv. Mr. Mayur Saavarkar, Adv. Ms. Divya Singh, Adv. Mr. Dinesh Jotwani, Adv. Mr. Dhawesh Pahuja, AOR Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR Ms. Meenakshi Arora, Sr. Adv. Mr. Ashish Shankar Kulshrestha, Adv. Mr. Srajan Shankar Kulshrestha, Adv. Mr. Akash, Adv. Mr. G. L. Verma, Adv. Mr. Deepak Singh, Adv. Mr. Amit Kumar, Adv. Mr. Ashish Pandey, AOR Ms. Chanchal, Adv. Mr. Danish Alvi, Adv. Mr. Mahesh Dutt Shukla, Adv. Mr. Arnav Narain, AOR Mr. Pradeep Kumar Rai, Sr. Adv. Ms. Farhat Naim, Adv. Mrs. Rajshree Rai, Adv. Mr. Vinay Kumar Rai, Adv. Ms. Modoyia Kayina, Adv. Mr. Shreyansh Singh, Adv. Mr. Paras Chauhan, Adv. Mr. Parimal Rai, Adv. Mr. Virendra Singh, Adv. Mr. Harish Gupta, Adv. Ms. Diksha Priya, Adv. M/S R And R Law Associates, AOR Mr. Abinash Kumar Mishra, AOR Mr. Aseem Chaturvedi, Adv. Mr. Arpit Kumar Singh, Adv. 5
CONMT.PET.(C) NO. 1820-1822/2017 Mr. Amaan Khan, Adv. M/S. Khaitan & Co., AOR Mr. Abhijnan Jha , AOR Mr. Ashish Raghuvanshi, Adv. Ms. C. Ankeeta Appanna, AOR Ms. Madhura Chitnis, Adv. Mr. Bhomesh Bellam, Adv. Mr. Ishit Mahajan, Adv. Mr. Himanshu Shekhar, AOR Mr. Dama Seshadri Naidu, Sr. Adv. Mr. C. Manishankar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Deepak Sharma, Adv. Mr. Ang Bajaj, Adv. Mr. Anandh K, AOR Mr. Kamal Kumar Pandey, Adv. Mr. Pawan Kumar Shukla, Adv. Mr. Pankaj Sharma, Adv. Mr. Pankaj Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. G.p. Mahto, Adv. Ms. Kanika, Adv. Mr. Raj Singh Rana, AOR Mr. Vishal Prasad, AOR Mr. Rahul Kaushik, Sr. Adv. Mr. Mukesh Verma, Adv. Mr. Shashank Singh, Adv. Mr. Prashant Bhardwaj, AOR Mr. Aditya Pratap Singh, Adv. Mr. Rishi Bharadwaj, Adv. Mr. Rahul Mehalwal, Adv. Mr. Rakesh Uttamchandra Upadhyay, AOR Mr. Gopal Sankaranarayanan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Krishan Kumar, AOR Mr. Seemant K Garg, Adv. Mr. Nitin Pal, Adv. Mr. Jayaraman S, Adv. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR Mr. Dama Seshadri Naidu, Sr. Adv. 6
CONMT.PET.(C) NO. 1820-1822/2017 Mr. C. Manishankar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Anandh K, Adv. Mr. R. Gopalakannan, Adv. Mr. Seralathan, Adv. Mr. Luke Joe, Adv. Mr. Ang Bajaj, Adv. Mr. Deepak Sharma, Adv. Mr. Abhinav Thakur, Adv. Mr. Sajal Jain, AOR Mr. Gopal Sankaranarayanan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sanjay K. Shandilya, Adv. Mr. Abhishek Kumar Singh, Adv. Ms.Molly Agarwal,Adv. Mr. Adit Srivastava, Adv. Mr. Mukul Rohatgi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Mahesh Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Arshit Anand, Adv. Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR Mr. Ranjit Kumar, Sr. Adv. Mr. D. Mahesh Babu, AOR Mr. Dhanaeswar Gudapalli, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Jain, Adv. Ms. Abha Jain, AOR Mr. Anupam Mishra, Adv. Mr. Raj Bahadur Yadav, AOR Mr. Balaji Srinivasan, AOR Mrs. Lakshmi Rao, Adv. Mr. V.g. Suresh Kumar, Adv. Mr. Aditya Vyas, Adv. Mr. Manoj K. Mishra, AOR Mr. Umesh Dubey, Adv. Ms. Madhulika, Adv. Mr. Anand Kumar Rai, Adv. Mr. Radeesh Kumar Mt, Adv. Mr. Amulya Dev Mishra, Adv. Mr. Rahul Shyam Bhandari, AOR Ms. G Priyadharshni, Adv. Mr. Satyam Pathak, Adv. Ms. Anshita Sharma, Adv. 7
CONMT.PET.(C) NO. 1820-1822/2017 Mr. Kaushal Yadav, AOR Mr. Nandlal Kumar Mishra, Adv. Ms. Naina Garg, Adv. Dr. Ajay Kumar, Adv. Mr. Arjun Raghuvanshi, Adv. Mr. A Velan, AOR Ms. Navpreet Kaur, Adv. Mr. Prince Singh, Adv. Mr. Nilay Rai, Adv. Ms. Kanika Sharma, Adv. Ms. Neelam Singh, AOR Ms. Rupali Sharma, AOR Mr. Amol Nirmalkumar Suryawanshi, AOR Mr. Ramesh Babu M. R., AOR Ms. Nisha Sharma, Adv. Mr. Ravindra Keshavrao Adsure, AOR Mr. Diggaj Pathak, AOR Ms. Shweta Sharma, Adv. Ms. Avsi Malik, Adv. Ms. Avasi Mullick, Adv. Mr. Abhinav Sharma, Adv. Ms. Vaibhavi Pathak, Adv. Ms. Trishita Bera, Adv. Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AOR Mr. Ashish Batra, AOR Mr. Pranaya Goyal, AOR Mr. Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, A.S.G. Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv. Mr. Rana Mukherjee, Adv. Mr. Kanu Agrawal, Adv. Mr. P.v.yogeswaran, Adv. Mr. Raman Yadav, Adv. Ms. Ruchi Kohli, Adv. Ms. Rekha Pandey, Adv. Mr. Sudarshan Lamba, AOR Mr. K.m.nataraj, A.S.G. Mr. Madhav Sinhal, Adv. Mr. Gaurang Bhushan, Adv. Mr. G.s. Makkar, Aor, Adv. 8
CONMT.PET.(C) NO. 1820-1822/2017 Mr. Saurabh Mishra, Sr. Adv. Mr. Rishi K. Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Piyush Vatsa, Adv. Mr. Amit V. Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Rahul K. Gupta, Adv. Mr. Ishaan Raj, Adv. Mr. Bishwajit Bhattacharyya, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sahil Tagotra, AOR Ms. Shreya Kasera, Adv. Dr. S. Muralidhar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Deepak Jain, Adv. Ms. Ninni Susan Thomas, Adv. Ms. Megha Khanna, Adv. Ms. Dashampreet Kaur, Adv. Ms. Pallak Bhagath, Adv. Mr./Ms. Sajal Gupta, Adv. Mr. Arsh Raina, Adv. Mr. Devender Chauhan, Adv. Mr. Vaibhav Manu Srivastava, AOR Ms. Deeplaxmi Subhash Matwankar , AOR Mr. Sudhanshu Chaudhary, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Nimbalkar, Adv. Mr. Hitendra Nath Rath, AOR Mr. Preshit Vilas Surshe, AOR Mr. Sureshan P., AOR Mr. Kunal Cheema, AOR Mr. Manish Singhvi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Mrityunjai Singh, AOR Mr. Rohan Kochhar, Adv. Ms. Jasmine Damkewala, AOR Ms. V Shruti Devi, Adv. Ms. Vaishali Sharma, Adv. Mr. Divyam Khera, Adv. Ms. Anagha S. Desai, AOR Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Adv. Mr. Md. Ali, AOR 9
CONMT.PET.(C) NO. 1820-1822/2017 Ms. Rooh-e-Hina Dua, AOR Ms. Shrutika Garg, Adv. Mr. Atmaram N.S. Nadkarni, Sr. Adv. Mr. Rishi K. Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Piyush Vatsa, Adv. Mr. Amit V. Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Rahul K. Gupta, Adv. Mr. Ishaan Raj, Adv. Mr.Sumeer Sodhi, AOR Mr. Arjun Nanda, Adv. Mr. Ranjit Kumar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Amitabh Chaturvedi, Adv. Ms. Rakhi Ray, AOR Ms. Prakti Jalan, Adv. Ms. Aakshi Batra, Adv. Mr. Shubhaankar Ray, Adv. Ms. Iyer Shruti Gopal, AOR Mr. Sailesh Sitani,Adv. Mr. Hitesh G., Adv. Ms. Nishita Jagetia, Adv. Mr. Anirudh Kate, Adv. Ms. Diptasree Bag, Adv. Mr.Aditya Kr. Chaudhary, Adv. Mr.Aditya Anand Singh, Adv. Mr. Rajesh Singh Chauhan, AOR Mr. Devadatt Kamat, Sr. Adv. Mr. NKS Menon, Adv. Ms. Usha Nandini, AOR Mr. Biju P. Raman, Adv. Mr. John Thomas Arakal, Adv. Mr. Ajay Desai, Adv. Mr. R.K. Sanghi, Sr. Adv. Md. Qayamuddin, AOR Mr. Sudhir Kumar, Adv. Mr. Anurag R., Adv. Mr. Manish Kumar, Adv. 10
CONMT.PET.(C) NO. 1820-1822/2017 UPON hearing the counsel, the Court made the following O R D E R 1. Mr. Shekhar Naphade, learned Amicus Curie, has filed a note. 2. Mr. Tushar Mehta, learned Solicitor General, appearing for Union of India and Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the Sahara, seeks four weeks’ time to file a response to the note. In addition, learned Solicitor General request for impleading the Ministry of Cooperation as a party respondent, inasmuch as various cooperative societies are also involved in the matter. 3. Let Ministry of Cooperation be made a party respondent. Cause title be amended accordingly. 4. Learned Amicus Curiae submits that after the responses are filed by the Union of India and Sahara, he will be required to file further note. 5. Response to the note of learned Amicus Curiae be filed by the Union of India and Sahara within a period of four weeks’ from today. 6. Learned Amicus Curiae shall file a note to the responses so filed, within a period of two weeks thereafter. 7. List after six weeks. 11
CONMT.PET.(C) NO. 1820-1822/2017 8. Learned Amicus Curiae is requested to furnish the soft copy of the note(s) to the Registry. All those parties, who are interested in getting the note, the same shall be supplied to them by the Registry. (POOJA SHARMA) (ANJU KAPOOR) AR-CUM-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 12
ITEM NO.809 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CONMT.PET.(C) No. 1820-1822/2017 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9833/2011 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUBRATA ROY SAHARA AND ORS. & ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 14-11-2025 These petitions were mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI For Applicant(s) : Ms. Divya Singh, Adv. Mr. Dinesh Jotwani, Adv. Mr. Dhawesh Pahuja, AOR Mr. Mrityunjai Singh, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR Mr. Sandeep Sudhakar Deshmukh, AOR Mr. Arnav Narain, AOR Mr. Abhijnan Jha , AOR M/S. Khaitan & Co., AOR Mr. Rakesh Uttamchandra Upadhyay, AOR Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR Mr. Manoj K. Mishra, AOR Mr. Rahul Shyam Bhandari, AOR Ms. Neelam Singh, AOR Ms. Rupali Sharma, AOR Mr. Ravindra Keshavrao Adsure, AOR Mr. Diggaj Pathak, AOR Mr. Pranaya Goyal, AOR Mr. Sudarshan Lamba, AOR Mr. Hitendra Nath Rath, AOR Mr. Kunal Cheema, AOR Mr. Mrityunjai Singh , AOR Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR Miss Tanya Agarwal, AOR Mrs. Priya Puri, AOR 1
Mr. Abhinay, AOR UPON being mentioned, the Court made the following O R D E R As prayed, List these applications (IA Nos. 241288 & 229256 of 2025 and IA Nos. 289266 & 289277 of 2025) alongwith other applications in Contempt Petition(C) No. 1820-1822/2017, which are slated to be listed on 17.11.2025. (DEEPAK SINGH) (ANJU KAPOOR) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 2
ITEM NO.808 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CONMT.PET.(C) No. 1820-1822/2017 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9833/2011 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUBRATA ROY SAHARA AND ORS. & ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 15-10-2025 These petitions were mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. VINOD CHANDRAN For Petitioner(s) : M/S. K J John And Co, AOR For Respondent(s) : Ms. Chitrangda Rastravara, Adv. Mr. M.K. Maroria, Adv. UPON being mentioned the Court made the following O R D E R As prayed, list IA Nos. 165933 and 165935 of 2025 alongwith other applications in Contempt Petition(C) Nos. 1820-1822 of 2017 on 17.11.2025. (DEEPAK SINGH) (ANJU KAPOOR) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CONMT.PET.(C) No. 1820-1822/2017 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9833/2011 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUBRATA ROY SAHARA AND ORS. & ORS. Respondent(s) [ONLY I.A. NOS. 63099/2025, 74972/2025, 74974/2025 IN CONMT. PET (C) NO. 1820-22/2017, I.A. NOS. 232665/2025, 233167/2025, 232892/2025, IA. NO. 4271/2025 AND 182815/2024 IN CONMT PET (C) NO. 412/2012 ARE LISTED UNDER THIS ITEM] IA No. 74974/2025 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 63099/2025 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS AND IA No. 74972/2025 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT) WITH CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 (XVII) (IA No. 232892/2025 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 232665/2025 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 233167/2025 – INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT, IA No. 4271/2025 – MODIFICATION AND IA No. 182815/2024 - MODIFICATION OF COURT ORDER) Date : 14-10-2025 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. SUNDRESH For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shekhar Naphade, Sr. Adv. (A.C.) Ms. Fauzia Shakil, AOR Ms. Salonee Paranjape, Adv. Ms. Tasmiya Taleha, Adv. Mr. Karan Bishnoi, Adv. Dr. Jamuna, Adv. Ms. Nitya Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Arvind P Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Sr. Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Shreyash Kumar, Adv. 1
Mr. Yashwant Sanjenbam, Adv. Mr. Harshit Singh, Adv. Mr. Siddhartha N, Adv. M/S. K J John And Co, AOR For Respondent(s) Applicant(s) : Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR Mr. Satish Khemchandani, Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Mr. B.m. Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Devanshu Yadav, Adv. Mr. Sameer Pandey, Adv. Mr. Sahil Sharma, Adv. Mr. Rishabh Parikh, Adv. Mr. Parijat Mishra, Adv. Ms. Chandni Sharma, Adv. Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Mr. Abhinay, AOR Mrs. S. Lakshmi Iyer, Adv. Ms. Deeksha Prakash, Adv. Ms. Parul Khurana, Adv. Mr. Raj Bahadur Yadav, AOR Mr. Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General Mr. N Venkatraman, A.S.G. Mr. Rana Mukerjee, Sr. Adv. Mr. Raj Bahadur Yadav Aor, Adv. Mr. Venkatraman Chandrashekhara Bharathi, Adv. Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv. Mr. P V Yogeshwaran, Adv. Mr. Kanu Agarwal, Adv. Dr. S. Murlidhar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Rajiv Shakdher, Adv. Mr. Deepak Jain, Adv. Ms. Ninni Susan Thomas, Adv. Ms. Dashampreet Kaur, Adv. Ms. Megha, Adv. Mr. Karan Khetani, Adv. Mr. Arsh Raina, Adv. Mr. Sajal Gupta, Adv. Mr. Davender Chauhan, Adv. Mr. Kamlesh Kumar Mishra, Adv. Ms. Renu, Adv. Mr. Gopal Sankaranarayanan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sanjay K. Shandilya, Adv. 2
Mr. Abhishek Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Molly Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Adit Srivastava, Adv. Mr. Ashutosh Yadav, AOR Mr. Ratnakar Dash, Sr. Adv. Dr. G. Sivabalamurgan, Adv. Mr. Selvaraj Matendran, Adv. Mr. C. Adhikesaran, Adv. Mr. Harikrishan, Adv. Mr. C. Kavin Anath, Adv. Mr. Dhass Pratap Singh V.M., Adv Ms. Nidhi Mohan Parashar, Adv. Mr. Vikrant Kumar, Adv. Mr. Pradeep Rai, Sr. Adv. Mr. Farhat Naim, Adv. Mr. Vinay Kumar Rai, Adv. Mrs. Rajshree Rai, Adv. Ms. Modoyia Kajima, Adv. Mr. Paras Chauhan, Adv. Mr. Saurabh Mishra, Sr. Adv. Mr. Rishi K. Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Piyush Vatsa, Adv. Mr. Amit Vikram Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Atmaram N.S. Nadkarni, Sr. Adv. Mr. Rishi K. Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Piyush Vatsa, Adv. Mr. Amit Vikram Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Avinash Ankit, Adv. Mr. Ishaan Raj, Adv. Mr. Rahul Kaushik, Sr. Ad. Mr. Mukush Verma, Adv. Mr. Pankaj Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Balaji Srinivasan, AOR Mr. Sandeep Sudhakar Deshmukh, AOR Mr. Nishant Sharma, Adv. Mr. Mayur Saavarkar, Adv. Mr. Dinesh Jotwani, Adv. Ms. Divya Singh, Adv. Mr. Dhanesh Pahuja, Adv. Mr. Kaushal Yadav, AOR Mr. A Velan , AOR Mr. Arnav Narain, AOR 3
Mr. Amol Nirmalkumar Suryawanshi, AOR Mr. Ramesh Babu M. R., AOR Mr. Abhijnan Jha , AOR Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AOR Mr. Ashish Batra, AOR Mr. Aseem Chaturvedi, Adv. Mr. Arpit Kumar Singh, Adv. M/S. Khaitan & Co., AOR Mr. Bishwajit Bhattacharyya, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sahil Tagotra, AOR Ms. Shreya Kasera, Adv. Ms. Deeplaxmi Subhash Matwankar , AOR Mr. Rakesh Uttamchandra Upadhyay, AOR Ms. Aarti U. Mishra, Adv. Mr. Harsh Som, Adv. Mr. Preshit Vilas Surshe, AOR Mr. Sureshan P., AOR Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR Ms. Jasmine Damkewala, AOR Ms. Vaishali Sharma, Adv. Mr. Divyam Khera, Adv. Ms. V Shruti Devi, Adv. Mr. Satyajit A. Desai, Adv. Mr. Rahul Verma, Adv. Mr. Abhinav K. Mutyalwar, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Gautam, Adv. Mr. Sachin Singh, Adv. Mr. Ananya Thapliyal, Adv. Ms. Anagha S. Desai, AOR Mr. Pradeep Kumar Rai, Sr. Adv. Mr. Manoj K. Mishra, AOR Mr. Umesh Dubey, Adv. Ms. Madhulika, Adv. Mr. Anand Kumar Rai, Adv. Mr. Radeesh Kumar Mt, Adv. Mr. Amulya Dev Mishra, Adv. Ms. Yashica Rawal, Adv. Mrs. Pragya Baghel, AOR Mr. Vibhuti Sushant Gupta, Adv. Mr. Narender Kumar Verma, AOR Ms. Neelam Singh, AOR 4
Ms. Rupali Sharma, AOR Ms. Anuradha Mutatkar, AOR Mr. Ravindra Keshavrao Adsure, AOR Mr. Yash Prashant Sonavane, Adv. Mr. Diggaj Pathak, AOR Ms. Shweta Sharma, Adv. Ms. Avsi Malik, Adv. Mr. Abhinav Sharma, Adv. Ms. Trishita Bera, Adv. Ms. Vaibhavi Pathak, Adv. Mr. Sanjay Bhaseen, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sarvesh Kumar Dubey, Adv. Ms. Ishita Bhaseen, Adv. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Verma, Adv. Mr. T.S. Nanda Kumar, AOR Mr. Divakar Kumar, AOR Mr. Pranaya Goyal, AOR Mr. Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, A.S.G. Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv. Mr. Rana Mukherjee, Adv. Mr. Kanu Agrawal, Adv. Mr. P.V.Yogeswaran, Adv. Mr. Raman Yadav, Adv. Ms. Ruchi Kohli, Adv. Ms. Rekha Pandey, Adv. Mr. Sudarshan Lamba, AOR Mr. S.B. Talakar, Adv. Mr. Pulkit Agarwal, AOR Mr. Sudhanshu Kumar, Adv. Mr. Pratap Nimbalkar, Adv. Ms. Deeplaxmi S. Matwankar, AOR Mr. C. George Thomas, AOR Mr. Omkar Geedh, Adv. Mr. Gurkaranbir Singh, Adv. Mr. Hitendra Nath Rath, AOR Ms. Veronica Shikha Johnson, Adv. Ms. Laxmi, Adv. Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR Mr. Gaurav Agarwal, Sr. Adv. Mr. Deepak Singh, Adv. 5
Ms. Angel, Adv. Mr. Abdesh Kumar, Adv. Mr. Rajinder Pal Singh, Adv. Mr. Anurag Pandey, Adv. Mr. Vishpal Singh, Adv. Mr. Ashish Pandey, AOR Mr. Jayant Bhushan, Sr. Adv. Mr. MKS Menon, Adv. Mr. K. Basappa Gowda, Adv. Ms. Usha Nandini V., AOR Mr. T.M. Malli Karjun, Adv. Mr. John Thomas Arakal, Adv. Mr. Kunal Cheema, AOR Mr. Mrityunjai Singh, AOR Mr. Rohan Kochhar, Adv. Mr. Abinash Kumar Mishra, AOR M/S. Khaitan & Co., AOR Mr. Aseem Chaturvedi, Adv. Mr. Arpit Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv. Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR Mr. Shrirang B. Varma, Adv. Mr. Bharat Bagla, Adv. Mr. Sourav Singh, Adv. Mr. Aditya Krishna, Adv. Mr. Adarsh Dubey, Adv. Ms. Chitransha Singh Sikarwar, Adv. Mr. Himanshu Shekhar, AOR Mr. Anandh K, AOR Ms. Tanya Agarwal, AOR Mr. Kamlesh Kumar Mishra, Adv. Ms. Renu, Adv. Ms. Swagata Gupta, Adv. Ms. Shivani Verma, Adv. Mr. Piyush Kumar Singh, Adv. Ms. Mansi, Adv. Mr. Vishal Prasad, AOR Mr. Prashant Bhardwaj, AOR Mr. Aditya Pratap Singh, Adv. Mr. Rishi Bharadwaj, Adv. Mr. Rahul Mehalwal, Adv. 6
Mr. Vibhav Srivastava, Adv. Mrs. Priya Puri, AOR Mr. Sachin Dubey, Adv. Ms. Riya Dogra, Adv. Mr. Sharad Kumar Puri, Adv. Ms. Ashita Arora, Adv. Mr. Tushar Mehta Ld, Solicitor General Mr. N Venkataraman, A.S.G. Mrs. Aishwarya Bhati Ld, A.S.G. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR Mr. V C Bharathi, Adv. Ms. Rekha Pandey, Adv. Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv. Mr. P V Yogeswaran, Adv. Mrs. Chitrangda Rastaravara, Adv. Mr. Raman Yadav, Adv. Mrs. Rana Mukherjee, Adv. Mr. Kanu Agarwal, Adv. Mrs. Ruchi Kohli, Sr. Adv. Mr. Aman Mehta, Adv. Mr. Dama Seshadri Naidu, Sr. Adv. Mr. C. Manishankhar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Anandh K, Adv. Mr. R. Gopalakannan, Adv. Mr. Seralathan S, Adv. Mr. Luke Joe, Adv. Mr. Ang Bajaj, Adv. Mr. Deepak Sharma, Adv. Mr. Abhinav Thakur, Adv. Mr. Sajal Jain, AOR Mr. Vinayak Bhandari, Adv. Mr. Arnav Narain, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R IA No. 232665 of 2025 1. This application has been filed by the Sahara India Commercial Corporation Limited (SICCL) seeking various directions, including approval of the transaction as contemplated under the Term Sheet dated 06.09.2025, executed by and between, inter alia , the applicant and the Adani 7
Properties Private Limited. 2. Several other directions have also been sought by the applicant. 3. Mr. Tushar Mehta, learned Solicitor General of India states that before considering the prayers made in the application, it would be appropriate that the Union of India through the Ministry of Finance as well as the Ministry of Corporate Affairs be heard. 4. We, therefore, direct the applicant to implead the Union of India through Ministry of Finance as well as the Ministry of Corporate Affairs as non-applicant(s) in the present application. 5. At this juncture, learned senior counsel appearing for various intervenors raise several claims vis-a-vis properties mentioned in the term sheet dated 06.09.2025. 6. It is submitted that the said term sheet consists certain properties in respect of which the rights have already been crystalized in favour of intervenors/applicants. 7. Learned Solicitor General of India further submits that the adjudication of such claims will have to be done before an appropriate forum, however, it will not be possible for this Court to adjudicate each of the claims. 8. Shri Shekhar Naphade, learned Amicus Curiae states that the Sahara India Real Estate Corporation Ltd. and Sahara 8
Housing Investment Corporation Ltd, should first be directed to deposit the balance amount of approximately Rs.9,000/- crores alongwith interest. 9. We find that before these applications are considered, it will be appropriate that the parties who claim to have any rights in respect of any of the properties listed in the captioned application shall lodge their claims before the learned Amicus Curiae . 10. In that view of the matter, we request the learned Amicus Curiae to nominate an assisting counsel, who shall collate the said information in a chart indicating (i) the properties where there is no dispute (ii) the properties where the rights have crystalized and (iii) the properties which are under the shadow of doubt. 11. The Sahara India Commercial Corporation Limited shall also be entitled to submit its inputs before the learned Amicus Curiae. 12. In addition, we request the Union of India, the learned Amicus Curiae as well the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) to respond to the prayers made in the application. 13. Insofar as the applications (IA Nos. 74972 and 74974 of 2025) relating to the claims of employees are concerned, we direct the Sahara India Commercial Corporation Limited to 9
examine their claims and place its response on record on the next date. 14. List this application on 17.11.2025. IA No. 21178 of 2025 1. Learned counsel for the applicant seeks permission to withdraw this application. 2. Permission is granted. 3. Hence, the application is disposed of as withdrawn. Rest of the applications List on 17.11.2025 IA No.23883 of 2024 List this application alongwith IA No. 232665 of 2025 on 17.11.2025. (DEEPAK SINGH) (ANJU KAPOOR) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 10
Cont. Pet. (C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CONMT.PET.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9833/2011 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUBRATA ROY SAHARA AND ORS. & ORS. Respondent(s) [IA No. 20982/2025 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 29310/2025 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 28588/2025 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION, IA No. 21178/2025 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION, IA No. 20985/2025 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION and IA No. 247435/2024 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION] WITH CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 (XVII) [FOR APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS ON IA 233758/2024, FOR MODIFICATION OF COURT ORDER ON IA 253470/2024, FOR APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS ON IA 282738/2024, IA No. 282738/2024 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 233758/2024 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS and IA No. 253470/2024 - MODIFICATION OF COURT ORDER] C.A. No. 7152-7153/2016 (XVII-A) [IA No. 23883/2024 - APPLICATION FOR SETTLEMENT, IA No. 122100/2020 - APPLICATION FOR SUBSTITUTION, IA No. 122101/2020 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 172155/2023 - EARLY HEARING APPLICATION and IA No. 72714/2022 - RELEASE OF THE FIXED DEPOSIT] C.A. No. 9224-9225/2016 (XVII-A) W.P.(C) No. 877/2018 (X) [IA No. 96025/2020 - APPLICATION FOR TAGGING/DETAGGING] Date : 12-02-2025 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. SUNDRESH HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE BELA M. TRIVEDI Amicus Curiae Mr. Shekhar Naphade, Sr. Advocate Ms. Fauzia Shakil, AOR Ms. Salonee Paranjape, Adv. 1
Cont. Pet. (C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. Ms. Tasmiya Taleha, Adv. Mr. Karan Bishnoi, Adv. Ms. Jamuna, Adv. For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Sr. Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Shreyash Kumar, Adv. Mr. Imilikaba Jamir, Adv. Mr. Yashwant Sanjenbam, Adv. Mr. Harshit Singh, Adv. Mr. Siddhartha N., Adv. M/s. K.J. John And Co., AOR Mr. Siddhartha Dave, Sr. Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, AOR Mr. Yajat Gulia, Adv. Mr. Bishwajit Bhattacharyya, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sahil Tagotra, AOR Mr. Rohan Thawani, Adv. Ms. Pooja Dhar, AOR Ms. S. Ambica, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Mr. V. Giri, Sr. Adv. Mr. Balbir Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Mr. B.M. Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Yajat Gulia, Adv. Mr. Devanshu Yadav, Adv. Mr. Sameer Pandey, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv. Mr. Sahil Sharma, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Rishabh Parikh, Adv. Ms. Chandni Sharma, Adv. Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Ms. Rao Vishwaja, Adv. Mr. Rahul Narang, Adv. Mr. Harshed Sundar, Adv. Mr. Nihar Dharmadhikari, Adv. Mr. Rohan Thawani, Adv. Ms. Pooja Dhar, AOR Ms. S. Ambica, Adv. 2
Cont. Pet. (C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Sr. Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Shreyash Kumar, Adv. Mr. Imilikaba Jamir, Adv. Mr. Yashwant Sanjenbam, Adv. Mr. Harshit Singh, Adv. Mr. Siddhartha N., Adv. M/s. K.J. John And Co., AOR Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, AOR Mr. Yajat Gulia, Adv. Mr. Suryakant Singla, Sr. Adv. Ms. Supriya Juneja, AOR Ms. Arya Suresh, Adv. Mr. Manoj K. Mishra, AOR Mr. Umesh Dubey, Adv. Mr. Bheem Pratap Singh, Adv. Ms. Rajshree Rai, Adv. Mr. Vinay Rai, Adv. Ms. Pooja Agarwal, Adv. Ms. Madhulika, Adv. Mr. Anand Kumar Rai, Adv. Mr. Vishal Prasad, AOR Ms. Neelam Singh, AOR Mr. N. Venkataraman, A.S.G. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR Mr. V.C. Bharathi, Adv. Ms. Rekha Pandey, Adv. Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv. Mr. P.V. Yogeswaran, Adv. Mrs. Chitrangda Rastaravara, Adv. Mr. Raman Yadav, Adv. Mr. Ravindra Keshavrao Adsure, AOR Mr. Tushar Mehta, S.G. Mr. N. Venkatraman, A.S.G. Mr. Rana Mukerjee, Sr. Adv. Mr. Raj Bahadur Yadav, AOR Mr. V.C. Bharathi, Adv. Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv. Mr. P.V. Yogeshwaran, Adv. Mr. Kanu Agarwal, Adv. Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Sr. Adv. 3
Cont. Pet. (C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. Mr. Dhruv Mehta, Sr. Adv. Mr. Dhawal Mehta, Adv. Mr. Krishna Balaji Moorthy, Adv. Ms. Shachi Udeshi, Adv. Mr. Chiranjivi Sharma, Adv. Ms. Nehal Gupta, Adv. Mr. Nidhiram Sharma, Adv. Ms. Anupama Dhruve, Adv. Ms. Juhi Shah, Adv. Ms. Seher Bhalla, Adv. Ms. Richa Singh, Adv. Mr. Pranaya Goyal, AOR Mr. Kaushal Yadav, AOR Mr. Nandlal Kumar Mishra, Adv. Dr. Ajay Kumar, Adv. Mr. Ritul Tandon, Adv. Mr. Arjun Raghuvanshi, Adv. Mr. A Velan, AOR Mr. Amol Nirmalkumar Suryawanshi, AOR Mr. Ramesh Babu M.R., AOR Ms. Nisha Sharma, Adv. Ms. Manisha Singh, Adv. Ms. Jagrit Bharti, Adv. Ms. Tanya Chowdhary, Adv. Mr. Rohan Srivastava, Adv. Mr. Kunal Cheema, AOR Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AOR Mr. Ashish Batra, AOR Mr. Gaurav Agrawal, AOR Ms. Deeplaxmi Subhash Matwankar, AOR Mr. Sahil Tagotra, AOR Mr. Sureshan P., AOR Mr. Shivam Yadav, Adv. Mr. Preshit Vilas Surshe, AOR Mr. Tarun Kumar, Adv. Mr. Satyajit A. Desai, Adv. Mr. Rahul Verma, Adv. Mr. Abhinav K. Mutyalwar, Adv. 4
Cont. Pet. (C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. Mr. Siddharth Gautam, Adv. Mr. Sachin Singh, Adv. Mr. Ananya Thapliyal, Adv. Ms. Anagha S. Desai, AOR Ms. Jasmine Damkewala, AOR Ms. Vaishali Sharma, Adv. Mr. Divyam Khera, Adv. Mr. Narender Kumar Verma, AOR Mrs. Pragya Baghel, AOR Ms. Anuradha Mutatkar, AOR Mr. S. Niranjan Reddy, Sr. Adv. Mr. Arnav Narain, AOR Mr. Vinayak Bhandari, Adv. Ms. Teesta Mishra, Adv. Ms. Akhila Palem, Adv. Mr. Divakar Kumar, AOR Mr. Ranjit Kumar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Maninder Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Vijayendra Pratap Singh, Adv. Ms. Vatsala Rai, Adv. Mr. Tanmay Sharma, Adv. Mr. Abhijnan Jha, AOR Mr. C. George Thomas, AOR Mr. Neeraj Kishan Kaul, Sr. Adv. Mr. Aseem Chaturvedi, Adv. Mr. Kingshuk Banerjee, Adv. Mr. Harsh Parikh, Adv. Mr. Arpit Kumar Singh, Adv. Ms. Phalguni Nigam, Adv M/s. Khaitan & Co., AOR Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR Mr. Rakesh Uttamchandra Upadhyay, AOR Mr. Abinash Kumar Mishra, AOR Mr. Manan Kumar Mishra, Sr. Adv. Mr. Mahesh Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Ankur Saigal, Adv. Ms. Madhavi Agarwal, Adv. Mr. E.C. Agrawala, AOR 5
Cont. Pet. (C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. Mr. Himanshu Shekhar, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R After the last date of hearing, we have had several bidders/proposers in re the land located at Versova. Mr. Shekhar Naphade, learned Amicus Curiae has submitted a note before us, stating that the Versova land, as is evident from the letter dated 28.07.1997 of the Collector, Mumbai, Suburban District, is Mangrove forest area, either fully or partially. In the above circumstances, we deem it appropriate to issue notice to the Secretary, Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change 1 and the Secretary, Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs 2 as well as the Chief Secretary, State of Maharashtra, to inform this Court about the present status of the Versova land. Full details of the said Versova land will be provided to the Ministries/State Government by Sahara India Commercial Corporation Limited 3 by way of photocopies of the purchase/sale deed(s) as well as the documents issued by the Revenue authorities for demarcation and status of the land. The respective Secretaries, MoEFCC and MoHUA, Union of India and the Chief Secretary, State of Maharashtra will file their respective affidavits within a period of 15 days from the date of service of notice along with a copy of this order. A copy of this order will also be served on the standing/nominated counsel for the Central Agency and the State of 1 “MoEFCC”, for short. 2 “MoHUA”, for short 3 “SICCL”, for short 6
Cont. Pet. (C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. Maharashtra for compliance. We also deem it appropriate to direct that two officers/nominee each of the Securities and Exchange Board of India 4 and SICCL along with two property consultants/real estate experts belonging to Mumbai, nominated by SEBI, will have a joint meeting to explore the terms and conditions on which the Versova land can be monetized to get maximum value. Mr. Shekhar Naphade, learned Amicus Curiae will chair the meeting(s). We may note here the submission made on behalf of the SICCL that it has got an offer of ₹ 8,000 crores under a joint venture development agreement with a third party. There are other bidders, who are ready and willing to offer substantial payments, but may not prefer a joint venture development agreement and instead prefer an outright sale. For the time being, we are not examining the said question, as it is a matter related to commerce and business, and it would be appropriate if this issue is first examined and considered by the aforesaid officers/nominees of SEBI and SICCL along with two property consultants. We permit the petitioners/proposers, who have moved applications before this Court, to make a written note or proposal, which will help the above Committee and this Court to ascertain the proper method for realization of the maximum value and monetization of the Versova land. It will be open to the intervenors/proposers to submit their written proposals to SEBI, SICCL and Mr. Shekhar Naphade, learned Amicus Curiae . 4 “SEBI”, for short 7
Cont. Pet. (C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. The sum of ₹ 1,000 crores deposited by Oberoi Realty Limited, for the time being, is directed to be returned to it along with interest accrued, if any, on the said amount. We clarify that the intervenors who have moved applications will be heard on the required aspects. We, however, refrain from passing any order at this stage, on the said intervention applications. Re-list on 02.04.2025 at 3.00 p.m. (DEEPAK GUGLANI) (R.S. NARAYANAN) AR-cum-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 8
1 ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NOS. 1820-1822/2017 IN CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NO 413/2012 IN CIVIL APPEAL NO. 9833/2011 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUBRATA ROY SAHARA AND ORS. & ORS. Respondent(s) (Mr. Shekhar Naphade, Sr. Advocate (Amicus Curie) Ms. Fauzia Shakil, AOR (IA No. 247435/2024 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION AND IA No. 224258/2024 - RECTIFICATION OF COURTS ORDER IN TYPOGRAPHICAL ERROR) WITH CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 (XVII) (IA No. 282738/2024 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 233758/2024 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 253470/2024 - MODIFICATION OF COURT ORDER) C.A. No. 7152-7153/2016 (XVII-A) (IA No. 23883/2024 - APPLICATION FOR SETTLEMENT IA No. 122100/2020 - APPLICATION FOR SUBSTITUTION IA No. 122101/2020 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 172155/2023 - EARLY HEARING APPLICATION IA No. 72714/2022 - RELEASE OF THE FIXED DEPOSIT) C.A. No. 9224-9225/2016 (XVII-A) W.P.(C) No. 877/2018 (X) (IA No. 96025/2020 - APPLICATION FOR TAGGING/DETAGGING) Date : 08-01-2025 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. SUNDRESH HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE BELA M. TRIVEDI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvid P. Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Sr. Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Shreyash Kumar, Adv.
2 Mr. Amarjit Singh Bedi, Adv. Mr. Imli K. Jamir, Adv. M/s. K J John And Co, AOR Mr. Siddhartha Dave, Sr. Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, AOR Mr. Yajat Gulia, Adv. Ms. Arundhuti Mukherjee, Adv. Mr. Bishwajit Bhattacharyya, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sahil Tagotra, AOR Mr. Sujay Jain, Adv. Ms. Pooja Dhar, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Mr. V. Giri, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Mr. B. M. Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Devanshu Yadav, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Sameer Pandey, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv. Mr. Sahil Sharma, Adv. Mr. Rishabh Parikh, Adv. Mr. Yajat Gulia, Adv. Ms. Chandni Sharma, Adv. Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Ms. Rao Vishwaja, Adv. Mr. Rahul Narang, Adv. Mr. Harshed Sundar, Adv. Mr. Nihar Dharmadhikari, Adv. Mr. Rohan Thawani, Adv. Ms. S. Ambica, Adv. Ms. Pooja Dhar, AOR M/s. K J John And Co, AOR Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, AOR Mr. Yajat Gulia, Adv. Mr. Suryakant Singla, Sr. Adv. Ms. Supriya Juneja, AOR Mr. Manoj K. Mishra, AOR Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR
3 Mr. Syed Faraz Alam, Adv. Mr. Atharva Gaur, Adv. Mr. Aayushman Aggarwal, Adv. Mr. Shaurya Gupta, Adv. Ms. Neelam Singh, AOR Mr. Abinash Kumar Mishra, AOR Mr. Ravindra Keshavrao Adsure, AOR Mr. Himanshu Shekhar, AOR Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Dhruv Mehta, Sr. Adv. Mr. Dhawal Mehta, Adv. Mr. Krishna Balaji Moorthy, Adv. Ms. Shachi Udeshi, Adv. Mr. Chiranjivi Sharma, Adv. Ms. Nehal Gupta, Adv. Mr. Nidhiram Sharma, Adv. Ms. Anupama Dhruve, Adv. Ms. Juhi Shah, Adv. Ms. Seher Bhalla, Adv. Mr. Pranaya Goyal, AOR Mr. Vishal Prasad, AOR Mr. N Venkataraman, A.S.G. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR Mr. V C Bharathi, Adv. Ms. Rekha Pandey, Adv. Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv. Mr. P V Yogeswaran, Adv. Mrs. Chitrangda Rastaravara, Adv. Mr. Raman Yadav, Adv. Mr. Kunal Cheema, AOR Mr. Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General Mr. N Venkatraman, A.S.G. Mr. Rana Mukerjee, Sr. Adv. Mr. Raj Bahadur Yadav Aor, Adv. Mr. Venkatraman Chandrashekhara Bharathi, Adv. Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv. Mr. P V Yogeshwaran, Adv. Mr. Kanu Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Raj Bahadur Yadav, AOR Mr. Kaushal Yadav, AOR Mr. Nandlal Kumar Mishra, Adv. Dr. Ajay Kumar, Adv.
4 Mr. Ritul Tandon, Adv. Mr. Arjun Raghuvanshi, Adv. Mr. Amol Nirmalkumar Suryawanshi, AOR Mr. Rohan Srivastava, Adv. Mr. Ramesh Babu M. R., AOR Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AOR Mr. Ashish Batra, AOR Mr. Gaurav Agrawal, AOR Ms. Deeplaxmi Subhash Matwankar, AOR Mr. Sahil Tagotra, AOR Mr. Sureshan P., AOR Mr. Preshit Vilas Surshe, AOR Mr. Satyajit A. Desai, Adv. Mr. Abhinav K. Mutyalwar, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Gautam, Adv. Mr. Sachin Singh, Adv. Mr. Ananya Thapliyal, Adv. Ms. Anagha S. Desai, AOR Mr. Preetraj R. Dhok, Adv. Ms. Jasmine Damkewala, AOR Ms. Vaishali Sharma, Adv. Mr. Divyam Khera, Adv. Mr. Advait Joshi, Adv. Mr. Narender Kumar Verma, AOR Mrs. Pragya Baghel, AOR Ms. Anuradha Mutatkar, AOR Mr. Rakesh Uttamchandra Upadhyay, AOR Mr. Divakar Kumar, AOR Mr. Manan Kumar Mishra, Sr. Adv. Mr. Mahesh Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Ankur Saigal, Adv. Ms. Madhavi Agarwal, Adv. Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR Mr. C. George Thomas, AOR
5 Mr. Ratnakar Dash, Sr. Adv. Mr. G. Sivabalamurugan, Adv. Mr. S. Mahendran, Adv. Mr. Hari Krishnan P.V., Adv. Mr. C. Kavin Ananth, Adv. Mr. Shekhar Naphade, Sr. Adv./Amicus Curiae Ms. Fauzia Shakil, AOR Ms. Salonee Parajape, Adv. Ms. A.S. Jamuna, Adv. Ms. Tasmiya Taleha, Adv. Mr. C. Manishankar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Anandh K., AOR Mr. Gopal Kannan, Adv. Mr. Ang Bajaj, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel, the Court made the following O R D E R The proposer will hand over the proposal to the learned counsel appearing for the Securities and Exchange Board of India 1 and to Mr. Shekhar Naphade, learned Senior Advocate, who is appearing as an Amicus Curiae in the present matters. The said proposal in a sealed cover has been handed over by the proposer to us. The same will be taken on record. SEBI will conduct their own investigation/scrutiny and examine the proposal. They may file their response in a sealed cover in this Court. The said report will be furnished to the learned Advocate-on-Record appearing for the proposer, Sahara India Real Estate Corporation Ltd. 2 and Sahara Housing Investment Corporation Ltd. 3 A copy of I.A. No. 247435/2024 filed by Valor Estate Limited will also be furnished to the learned Advocate-on-Record appearing for SEBI, SIRECL and SHICL. The proposal given by Valor Estate Limited will be also 1 For short, “SEBI”. 2 For short, “SIRECL”. 3 For short, “SHICL”.
6 examined by SEBI and the learned Amicus Curiae . Valor Estate Limited has undertaken to deposit 1,000 crores in this Court by₹ way of a demand draft within a period of fifteen days from today. The demand draft brought to the Court by Oberoi Realty Ltd. will also be deposited in the Registry of this Court within a period of fifteen days from today. However, the aforesaid demand drafts will not be encashed. Re-list on 05.02.2025 at 03.00 p.m. I.A. No. 253470/2024 Learned counsel appearing for the parties are permitted to explore possibility of settlement through Mediation. The parties will approach the coordinator of the Supreme Court Mediation Centre for appointment of a Mediator. However, the mediation settlement, if arrived at, shall remain a proposal till accepted by this Court. M/s. Vaagai Commercial Ventures LLP can also participate in the mediation proceedings. The settlement, if arrived, may be submitted in this Court in a sealed cover. Re-list on 05.02.2025 at 03.00 p.m. I.A. No. 224258/2024 The present application for correction in the order dated 05.09.2024 is allowed. The correction will be carried out in today’s date. (BABITA PANDEY) (R.S. NARAYANAN) COURT MASTER (SH) ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
CONMT.PET.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 Etc. (REVISED) ITEM NO.1 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CONTEMPT PETITION (C) NS. 1820-1822/2017 IN CONTEMPT PETITION (C) Nos. 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9833/2011 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUBRATA ROY SAHARA AND & ORS. Respondent(s) (IA No. 147567/2023 - APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION IA No. 159484/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 54042/2023 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 27489/2023 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 160131/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 78070/2023 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 194826/2024 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 161884/2022 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 159473/2022 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 27488/2023 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 78069/2023 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 54040/2023 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 194596/2024 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 161889/2022 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 183801/2023 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 160124/2022 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT) WITH CONMT.PET.(C) No. 260/2013 In C.A. No. 8643/2012 (XVII) (IA No. 136343/2018 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 102871/2019 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT) R.P.(Crl.) No. 458/2014 In W.P.(Crl.) No. 57/2014 (X) (IA No. 14799/2014 - APPLICATION FOR INSPECTION OF FILE) T.C.(C) No. 87/2014 (III-A) W.P.(C) No. 1424/2019 (X) W.P.(C) No. 1123/2020 (X) (FOR ADMISSION) W.P.(C) No. 1427/2020 (X) (FOR ADMISSION IA No. 7256/2022 - EARLY HEARING APPLICATION) W.P.(C) No. 1333/2020 (X)
CONMT.PET.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 Etc. (FOR ADMISSION) Diary No(s). 26472/2020 (XVII) C.A. No. 7443-7444/2021 (XVII) (IA No. 159618/2021 - STAY APPLICATION) W.P.(C) No. 312/2022 (X) (FOR ADMISSION) W.P.(C) No. 284/2022 (X) (FOR ADMISSION) CONMT.PET.(C) No. 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9833/2011 (XVII) (IA No. 1/2013 - STAY APPLICATION) CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 (XVII) (IA No. 196057/2024 - ADDITION / DELETION / MODIFICATION PARTIES IA No. 183/2016 - APP FOR PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS IA No. 112086/2024 - APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION IA No. 194846/2024 - APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION IA No. 112083/2024 - APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION IA No. 68897/2024 - APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION IA No. 138094/2018 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 163394/2019 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 130199/2020 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 136394/2021 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 118234/2020 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 44866/2021 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 203516/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 188912/2024 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 176906/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 188847/2024 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 88721/2017 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 58117/2020 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 44861/2021 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 99284/2021 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 169125/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 203490/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 87599/2017 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 52680/2020 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 78626/2021 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 109345/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 68141/2024 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 30932/2018 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 43715/2020 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 24886/2021 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 95547/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 203485/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 88532/2023 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 48440/2024 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 10494/2019 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 71965/2021 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS
CONMT.PET.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 Etc. IA No. 6292/2024 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 49580/2017 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 166294/2019 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 202750/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 203523/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 191447/2023 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 112089/2024 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 47681/2017 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 63773/2018 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 56231/2018 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 137135/2018 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 193416/2022 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 134546/2018 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 142662/2023 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 131658/2023 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 78376/2018 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 196058/2024 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 18940/2018 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 74012/2018 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 11181/2018 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 160939/2018 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 1446/2022 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 123268/2017 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 97945/2019 - EARLY HEARING APPLICATION IA No. 44867/2021 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING AFFIDAVIT IA No. 44863/2021 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING AFFIDAVIT IA No. 115238/2017 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 142664/2023 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 48237/2018 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 99230/2019 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 87565/2017 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 112090/2024 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 25/2014 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 110/2015 - EXTENSION OF TIME IA No. 60598/2017 - EXTENSION OF TIME IA No. 136758/2019 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 99712/2021 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 232/2016 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 78372/2018 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 228/2016 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 71960/2021 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 22/2014 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 202747/2022 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 203520/2022 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 142671/2023 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 163389/2019 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 112084/2024 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 110821/2017 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 116947/2020 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 203515/2022 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 48224/2018 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 41944/2021 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 203489/2022 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT
CONMT.PET.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 Etc. IA No. 145301/2024 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 32764/2019 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 71987/2021 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 145099/2024 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 43479/2020 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 16501/2021 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 95545/2022 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 203484/2022 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 88529/2023 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 69646/2018 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 7584/2021 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 196054/2024 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 123051/2021 - MODIFICATION OF COURT ORDER IA No. 129469/2018 - MODIFICATION OF COURT ORDER IA No. 182815/2024 - MODIFICATION OF COURT ORDER IA No. 56/2015 - MODIFICATION OF COURT ORDER IA No. 119572/2023 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES IA No. 233/2016 - PERMISSION TO FILE ANNEXURES IA No. 47133/2017 - PERMISSION TO PLACE ON RECORD SUBSEQUENT FACTS IA No. 28/2014 - RELEASE OF THE PETITIONER) T.C.(C) No. 83/2014 (XVII) T.C.(C) No. 86/2014 (XVII) T.C.(C) No. 84/2014 (XVII) T.C.(C) No. 85/2014 (XVII) C.A. No. 7152-7153/2016 (XVII-A) (IA No. 23883/2024 - APPLICATION FOR SETTLEMENT IA No. 122100/2020 - APPLICATION FOR SUBSTITUTION IA No. 122101/2020 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 172155/2023 - EARLY HEARING APPLICATION IA No. 72714/2022 - RELEASE OF THE FIXED DEPOSIT) C.A. No. 9224-9225/2016 (XVII-A) MA 1364-1365/2017 in C.A. No. 9813/2011 (XVII) (IA No. 123568/2017 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS) W.P.(C) No. 877/2018 (X) (IA No. 96025/2020 - APPLICATION FOR TAGGING/DETAGGING) W.P.(C) No. 1459/2019 (X) W.P.(C) No. 147/2024 (X) (FOR ADMISSION and IA No.53947/2024-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.) CONMT.PET.(C) No. 55-57/2016 IN conmt.pet.(c) no. 413/2012, conmt.pet.(c) no. 260/2013 @ CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 (XVII)
CONMT.PET.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 Etc. Date : 05-09-2024 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. SUNDRESH HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE BELA M. TRIVEDI Amicus Curie Mr. Shekhar Naphade, Sr. Adv. Ms. Fauzia Shakil, AOR Ms. Aishwarya Dash, Adv. Ms. Salonee Paranjpe, Adv. Ms. Farah Hashmi, Adv. Mr. Shivansh Saxena, Adv. Ms. Tasmiya Taleha, Adv. Mr. Karan, Adv. For Petitioner(s)/ Applicant(s) Mr. Arvind P Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Sr. Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Shreyash Kumar, Adv. M/s. K J John And Co, AOR Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR Mr. Rohan Thawani, Adv. Ms. Pooja Dhar, AOR Ms. S. Ambica, Adv. Ms. Sujata Kurdukar, AOR Mr. Siddharth Dave, Sr. Adv. Mr. Arvind Nayyar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, AOR Mr. Yajat Gulia, Adv. Mr. Bishwajit Bhattacharyya, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sahil Tagotra, AOR Dr. Arvind S. Avhad, AOR Mr. R. Balasubramanium, Sr. Adv. (N/P) Mr. Abhigya Kushwah, AOR Mr. Akhilesh Kumar Shrivastava, Adv. Mrs. Sunita Yadav, Adv.
CONMT.PET.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 Etc. Mr. Akash Sharma, Adv. Mr. Rishav Ranjan, Adv. Mr. Debashish Mishra, Adv. Ms. Sujatha Bagadhi, Adv. Ms. Sanya Minhas, Adv. Mr. Pradeep Kumar Dubey, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Rajkumar Murarka, Adv. Mr. Rohan Rohatgi, Adv. Mrs. Shubhangini Rohatgi, Adv. Mr. Ravindra Kumar Gupta, Adv. Mrs. Shally Bhasin, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Prashant Kumar, AOR Mrs. Shally Bhasin, AOR Mr. Siddharth Dave, Sr. Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, AOR Mr. Yajat Gulia, Adv. Ms. Arundhati Mukherjee, Adv. Mr. N. Venkataraman, A.S.G. Mrs. V. C. Bharathi, Adv. Mr. Merusagar Samantaray, Adv. Mr. Saransh Kumar, Adv. Mr. Bharat Sood, Adv. Ms. Nachiketa Joshi, Adv. Mr. T. S.sabarish, Adv. Mr. Amrish Kumar, AOR Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Mr. V. Giri, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Mr. B. M. Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv. Mr. Devanshu Yadav, Adv. Mr. Sameer Pandey, Adv. Mr. Yajat Gulia, Adv. Mr. Sahil Sharma, Adv. Mr. Rishabh Parikh, Adv. Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Ms. Rao Vishwaja, Adv. Mr. Rahul Narang, Adv. Mr. Harshed Sundar, Adv.
CONMT.PET.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 Etc. Mr. Nihar Dharmadhikari, Adv. Mr. Rohan Thawani, Adv. Ms. Pooja Dhar, AOR Ms. S. Ambica, Adv. M/s. K J John And Co, AOR Ms. Supriya Juneja, AOR Mr. Aniruddha Deshmukh, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv. Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR Mr. Bharat Bagla, Adv. Mr. Sourav Singh, Adv. Mr. Aditya Krishna, Adv. Ms. Preet S. Phanse, Adv. Mr. Adarsh Dubey, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Agrawal, AOR Mr. Sahil Tagotra, AOR Mr. Preshit Vilas Surshe, AOR Mr. Sahil Jodhwani, Adv. Mr. Tarun Kumar, Adv. Mr. Satyajit A. Desai, Adv. Mr. Abhinav K. Mutyalwar, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Gautam, Adv. Mr. Sachin Singh, Adv. Ms. Anagha S. Desai, AOR Ms. Jasmine Damkewala, AOR Ms. Vaishali Sharma, Adv. Mr. Divyam Khera, Adv. Mr. Vinay Kumar Mudgal, Adv. Mr. Vibhuti Sushant Gupta, Adv. Mr. Devang Mudgal, Adv. Mr. Narender Kumar Verma, AOR Mrs. Pragya Baghel, AOR Ms. Anuradha Mutatkar, AOR Mr. Divakar Kumar, AOR Mr. Manoj K. Mishra, AOR Mr. Umesh Dubey, Adv. Mr. Mithilesh Kumar Mishra, Adv. Ms. Madhulika, Adv.
CONMT.PET.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 Etc. Ms. Vuzmal Nehru, Adv. Mr. Amulya, Adv. Mr. C. George Thomas, AOR Dr. Yusuf Iqbal Yusuf, Adv. Mr. Bhavya Sethi, Adv. Ms. Gyanika Kochar, Adv. Mr. Mohd. Abid Sheikh, Adv. Ms. Neelam Singh, AOR Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR Mr. Ravindra Keshavrao Adsure, AOR Mr. Yash Prashant Sonavane, Adv. Mr. Sagar N.pahune Patil, Adv. Ms. Nikita Vilas Borde-patil, Adv. Mr. Abinash Kumar Mishra, AOR Mr. Pranaya Goyal, AOR Mr. Himanshu Shekhar, AOR Mr. M. L. Lahoty, Adv. Mr. Paban K Sharma, Adv. Mr. Anchit Sripat, Adv. Mr. Pranab Kumar Nayak, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar, Adv. Mr. Vishal Prasad, AOR Mr. Kunal Cheema, AOR Mr. N Venkataraman, A.S.G. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR Mr. V C Bharathi, Adv. Ms. Rekha Pandey, Adv. Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv. Mr. P V Yogeswaran, Adv. Mrs. Chitrangda Rastaravara, Adv. Mr. Raman Yadav, Adv. Mr. Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General(N/P) Mr. N Venkatraman, A.S.G. Mr. Rana Mukerjee, Sr. Adv. Mr. Raj Bahadur Yadav Aor, Adv. Mr. Venkatraman Chandrashekhara Bharathi, Adv. Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv. Mr. P V Yogeshwaran, Adv. Mr. Kanu Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Raj Bahadur Yadav, AOR Mr. Kaushal Yadav, AOR
CONMT.PET.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 Etc. Mr. Amol Nirmalkumar Suryawanshi, AOR Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AOR UPON hearing the counsel, the Court made the following O R D E R We have heard the learned Senior Advocates for the parties at some length. On behalf of M/s. Sahara India Real Estate Corporation Limited 1 and M/s. Sahara Housing Investment Corporation Limited 2 , an attempt was made for us to reconsider the orders dated 31.08.2012 3 , 05.12.2012 4 and 19.06.2015. In our opinion, besides being impermissible, no reasons and grounds are made out for us to reconsider these orders and the directions therein, including the directions given in paragraph 326 of the order dated 31.08.2012. The orders have attained finality. Review viz. the order dated 31.08.2012 was dismissed on 08.01.2013. The correctness of the findings and the directions given therein cannot be repeatedly challenged and questioned. The arguments and contentions raised were specifically examined in great depth and detail vide order dated 05.12.2012. Attempts made to reargue these issues were also rejected on 19.06.2015. Vide order dated 31.01.2019 as well, this Court had noted that the conduct of the 1 For short “SIRECL”. 2 For short “SHICL”. 3 Sahara India Real Estate Corp. Ltd. & Ors vs Securities & Exch. Board Of India & Anr. reported in (2013) 1 SCC 1. 4 Sahara India Real Estate Corp. Ltd. & Ors vs Securities & Exch. Board Of India & Anr. reported in (2013) 2 SCC 733.
CONMT.PET.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 Etc. contemnors does not inspire confidence, or reflect the intention to deposit the amount payable. The Securities Exchange Board of India 5 has filed the 23 rd Status Report. We give an opportunity to SIRECL and SHICL, and the erstwhile and the present directors of the said companies to file objections to the said report within a period of four weeks from today. Response to the said objections will be filed within four weeks after service of the objections by SEBI and the office of the amicus curiae . As per SEBI, 15,776 crore (as on 31.03.2024) are available on₹ deposit in the SEBI Sahara Refund Account. This figure is disputed on behalf of SIRECL and SHICL. It will be open to the authorized representatives of the companies to get in touch with SEBI and get the issue related to the accounts settled. As per order dated 31.08.2012, the principal amount payable is 24,029.73 crore,₹ 6 even if at this stage we do not go into the question of interest. The aspect of interest will be considered at an appropriate time. It is suggested on behalf of the Sahara Group of Companies that they may be given four weeks’ time to enter into a Joint Venture 7 or Development Agreement with regard to the land situated at Versova, Mumbai, Maharashtra. We accept this suggestion as a last and final opportunity, and direct that within the said period 5 For short “SEBI”. 6 There appears to be some dispute about the figure of the principal amount. It is stated on behalf of SEBI that the total principal amount due and payable to the depositors is ₹ 25,781.32 crore. We are not, for the time being, deciding this issue. 7 For short, “JV”.
CONMT.PET.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 Etc. of four weeks, they shall seek prior approval of this Court for executing the JV/Development Agreement. Further, an amount of 1,000 crore will be deposited along with the application seeking₹ approval of this Court for the JV/Development Agreement for the land at Versova. The agreement must state the details of the payments, date of payment etc. which will be deposited in the SEBI Sahara Refund Account. The balance principal amount should be deposited within a period of nine months. Thus, the Sahara Group of Companies may pursue negotiations for the JV/Development Agreement. The execution, however, will require prior approval of this Court. The amount of 1,000 crore, which will be deposited by a third₹ party, will be kept in an escrow account. In case this Court does not grant an approval for the JV/Development Agreement, the amount will be refunded to the said third party. In case the JV/Development Agreement is not entered into within a period of four weeks from today, this Court will undertake the sale of the Versova land on “as is where is” basis. We also permit the Sahara Group of Companies to enter into the JV/Development Agreement with regard to the other properties. The Sahara Group of Companies shall seek prior approval/permission of this Court before finalising any such JV/Development Agreement and creating any third-party rights. By orders dated 03.09.2024, 04.09.2024 and 05.09.2024, we have permitted initiation and continuation of legal proceedings against Sahara Group of Companies. Sale of any immovable property belonging to Sahara Group of Companies will comply with the mandate with regard to circle rate, and in case sale consideration is less/below
CONMT.PET.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 Etc. 90% of the circle rate, prior permission of this Court will be taken. The sale consideration would be deposited in the SEBI Sahara Refund Account. Liberty is granted to Sahara Group of Companies, as well as the third parties, to move an application before this Court for release of payment from the SEBI Sahara Refund Account. The direction given in the order dated 06.05.2016 regarding deployment of Delhi Police officials, is hereby recalled/withdrawn. The Registry will not entertain any application, objection or status report filed by any party or third party, without service thereof on the Advocate-on-Record for SEBI, SIRECL and SHICL, and the office of the learned amicus curiae 8 . Physical copy, as well as e-copy of the application/objection/status report will be served/filed. Liberty to mention the matter is granted to the parties. Re-list after one month. Writ Petition (C) No. 877/2018 Re-list after one month. I.A. No. 122/2015, 244/2016, 205/2016, 148/2016, 174/2016, 180- 182/2016, 185/2016, 196/2016, 284/2017, 268/2017, 47681/2017 and 60598/2017 It is stated that these applications have become infructuous. The same are dismissed as infructuous. 8 shekharnaphade.amicus@gmail.com (email ID of the office of learned Amicus Curiae ).
CONMT.PET.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 Etc. I.A. No. 83-85/2015 Re-list after one month. I.A. Nos. 63773/2018 and 137135/2018 Notwithstanding the pendency of the present proceedings and the order(s) passed herein, all proceedings can continue in accordance with law. The application is disposed of accordingly. We clarify that we have not made any comments on merits. All pleas and contentions are left open. I.A. No. 129469/2018 Re-list after one month. I.A. No. 74012/2018 Re-list after one month. I.A. No. 30932/2018 Notwithstanding the pendency of the present proceedings and the order(s) passed herein, all proceedings can continue in accordance with law. The application is disposed of accordingly. We clarify that we have not made any comments on merits. All pleas and contentions are left open. I.A. No. 56231/2018 In view of the statement made by the learned Senior Advocate appearing for SEBI, the present application has become infructuous. The application is accordingly dismissed as infructuous.
CONMT.PET.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 Etc. I.A. Nos. 58012/2018 and 138094/2018 No orders are required to be passed in these applications and the same will be treated as disposed of. I.A. No. 134546/2018 Re-list after one month. I.A. No. 176906/2022 Notwithstanding the pendency of the present proceedings and the order(s) passed herein, all proceedings can continue in accordance with law. The application is disposed of accordingly. We clarify that we have not made any comments on merits. All pleas and contentions are left open. I.A. Nos. 88529/2023 and 88532/2023 Re-list after one month. In the meanwhile, SEBI will file its response/reply to the applications within three weeks from today. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, will be filed within one week after service of the response/reply. I.A. Nos. 191447/2023 and 6292/2024 Notwithstanding the pendency of the present proceedings and the order(s) passed herein, all proceedings can continue in accordance with law. We clarify that we have not made any comments on merits. All pleas and contentions are left open.
CONMT.PET.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 Etc. The application is disposed of accordingly. I.A. No. 182815/2024 Re-list after one month. I.A. Nos. 31-33/2014 In view of the statement made by the learned Senior Advocate appearing for SEBI, the present application has become infructuous. The application is accordingly dismissed as infructuous. I.A. No. 104/2015 Re-list after one month. I.A. No. 218/2016 In view of the statement made by the learned Senior Advocate appearing for SEBI, the present application has become infructuous. The application is accordingly dismissed as infructuous. I.A. No. 88721/2017 Re-list after one month. I.A. No. 49580/2017 In view of the statement made by the learned Senior Advocate appearing for SEBI, the present application has become infructuous. The application is accordingly dismissed as infructuous. I.A. No. 118234/2020 Re-list after one month. I. A. No. 78626/2021, 48440/2024 and 188847/2024 These applications are allowed, subject to all just
CONMT.PET.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 Etc. exceptions. I.A. No. 136394/2021 Re-list after one month. In the meanwhile, reply will be filed by the non-applicant(s) within three weeks from today. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, will be filed within one week. from the date of service of the reply. I.A. No. 109345/2022 Re-list after one month. In the meanwhile, reply will be filed by the non-applicant(s) within three weeks from today. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, will be filed within one week. I.A. No. 119572/2023 The documents are taken on record. Application is accordingly disposed of. I.A. No. 68141/2024 Re-list after one month. In the meanwhile, it will be open to SIRECL and SHICL to file reply to the objections/complaints enclosed with the application within three weeks from today, with a copy to the complainant, who may file response within seven days from the date of service. I.A. No. 188912/2024 Issue notice to the non-applicant(s). Notice will be served by all modes, including dasti.
CONMT.PET.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 Etc. Reply will be filed by the non-applicant(s) within three weeks from today. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, will be filed within one week. Re-list after one month. (DEEPAK GUGLANI) (BABITA PANDEY) (R.S. NARAYANAN) AR-CUM-PS COURT MASTER (SH) ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
CONMT.PET.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 Etc. ITEM NO.1 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CONTEMPT PETITION (C) NS. 1820-1822/2017 IN CONTEMPT PETITION (C) Nos. 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9833/2011 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUBRATA ROY SAHARA AND & ORS. Respondent(s) (IA No. 147567/2023 - APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION IA No. 159484/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 54042/2023 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 27489/2023 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 160131/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 78070/2023 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 194826/2024 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 161884/2022 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 159473/2022 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 27488/2023 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 78069/2023 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 54040/2023 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 194596/2024 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 161889/2022 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 183801/2023 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 160124/2022 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT) WITH CONMT.PET.(C) No. 260/2013 In C.A. No. 8643/2012 (XVII) (IA No. 136343/2018 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 102871/2019 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT) R.P.(Crl.) No. 458/2014 In W.P.(Crl.) No. 57/2014 (X) (IA No. 14799/2014 - APPLICATION FOR INSPECTION OF FILE) T.C.(C) No. 87/2014 (III-A) W.P.(C) No. 1424/2019 (X) W.P.(C) No. 1123/2020 (X) (FOR ADMISSION) W.P.(C) No. 1427/2020 (X) (FOR ADMISSION IA No. 7256/2022 - EARLY HEARING APPLICATION) W.P.(C) No. 1333/2020 (X) (FOR ADMISSION)
CONMT.PET.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 Etc. Diary No(s). 26472/2020 (XVII) C.A. No. 7443-7444/2021 (XVII) (IA No. 159618/2021 - STAY APPLICATION) W.P.(C) No. 312/2022 (X) (FOR ADMISSION) W.P.(C) No. 284/2022 (X) (FOR ADMISSION) CONMT.PET.(C) No. 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9833/2011 (XVII) (IA No. 1/2013 - STAY APPLICATION) CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 (XVII) (IA No. 196057/2024 - ADDITION / DELETION / MODIFICATION PARTIES IA No. 183/2016 - APP FOR PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS IA No. 112086/2024 - APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION IA No. 194846/2024 - APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION IA No. 112083/2024 - APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION IA No. 68897/2024 - APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION IA No. 138094/2018 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 163394/2019 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 130199/2020 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 136394/2021 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 118234/2020 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 44866/2021 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 203516/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 188912/2024 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 176906/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 188847/2024 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 88721/2017 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 58117/2020 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 44861/2021 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 99284/2021 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 169125/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 203490/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 87599/2017 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 52680/2020 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 78626/2021 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 109345/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 68141/2024 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 30932/2018 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 43715/2020 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 24886/2021 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 95547/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 203485/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 88532/2023 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 48440/2024 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 10494/2019 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 71965/2021 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 6292/2024 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS
CONMT.PET.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 Etc. IA No. 49580/2017 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 166294/2019 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 202750/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 203523/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 191447/2023 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 112089/2024 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 47681/2017 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 63773/2018 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 56231/2018 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 137135/2018 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 193416/2022 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 134546/2018 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 142662/2023 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 131658/2023 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 78376/2018 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 196058/2024 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 18940/2018 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 74012/2018 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 11181/2018 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 160939/2018 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 1446/2022 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 123268/2017 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 97945/2019 - EARLY HEARING APPLICATION IA No. 44867/2021 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING AFFIDAVIT IA No. 44863/2021 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING AFFIDAVIT IA No. 115238/2017 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 142664/2023 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 48237/2018 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 99230/2019 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 87565/2017 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 112090/2024 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 25/2014 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 110/2015 - EXTENSION OF TIME IA No. 60598/2017 - EXTENSION OF TIME IA No. 136758/2019 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 99712/2021 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 232/2016 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 78372/2018 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 228/2016 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 71960/2021 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 22/2014 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 202747/2022 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 203520/2022 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 142671/2023 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 163389/2019 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 112084/2024 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 110821/2017 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 116947/2020 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 203515/2022 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 48224/2018 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 41944/2021 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 203489/2022 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 145301/2024 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT
CONMT.PET.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 Etc. IA No. 32764/2019 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 71987/2021 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 145099/2024 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 43479/2020 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 16501/2021 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 95545/2022 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 203484/2022 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 88529/2023 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 69646/2018 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 7584/2021 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 196054/2024 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 123051/2021 - MODIFICATION OF COURT ORDER IA No. 129469/2018 - MODIFICATION OF COURT ORDER IA No. 182815/2024 - MODIFICATION OF COURT ORDER IA No. 56/2015 - MODIFICATION OF COURT ORDER IA No. 119572/2023 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES IA No. 233/2016 - PERMISSION TO FILE ANNEXURES IA No. 47133/2017 - PERMISSION TO PLACE ON RECORD SUBSEQUENT FACTS IA No. 28/2014 - RELEASE OF THE PETITIONER) T.C.(C) No. 83/2014 (XVII) T.C.(C) No. 86/2014 (XVII) T.C.(C) No. 84/2014 (XVII) T.C.(C) No. 85/2014 (XVII) C.A. No. 7152-7153/2016 (XVII-A) (IA No. 23883/2024 - APPLICATION FOR SETTLEMENT IA No. 122100/2020 - APPLICATION FOR SUBSTITUTION IA No. 122101/2020 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 172155/2023 - EARLY HEARING APPLICATION IA No. 72714/2022 - RELEASE OF THE FIXED DEPOSIT) C.A. No. 9224-9225/2016 (XVII-A) MA 1364-1365/2017 in C.A. No. 9813/2011 (XVII) (IA No. 123568/2017 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS) W.P.(C) No. 877/2018 (X) (IA No. 96025/2020 - APPLICATION FOR TAGGING/DETAGGING) W.P.(C) No. 1459/2019 (X) W.P.(C) No. 147/2024 (X) (FOR ADMISSION and IA No.53947/2024-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.) CONMT.PET.(C) No. 55-57/2016 IN conmt.pet.(c) no. 413/2012, conmt.pet.(c) no. 260/2013 @ CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 (XVII)
CONMT.PET.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 Etc. Date : 05-09-2024 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. SUNDRESH HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE BELA M. TRIVEDI Amicus Curie Mr. Shekhar Naphade, Sr. Adv. Ms. Fauzia Shakil, AOR Ms. Aishwarya Dash, Adv. Ms. Salonee Paranjpe, Adv. Ms. Farah Hashmi, Adv. Mr. Shivansh Saxena, Adv. Ms. Tasmiya Taleha, Adv. Mr. Karan, Adv. For Petitioner(s)/ Applicant(s) Mr. Arvind P Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Sr. Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Shreyash Kumar, Adv. M/s. K J John And Co, AOR Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR Mr. Rohan Thawani, Adv. Ms. Pooja Dhar, AOR Ms. S. Ambica, Adv. Ms. Sujata Kurdukar, AOR Mr. Siddharth Dave, Sr. Adv. Mr. Arvind Nayyar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, AOR Mr. Yajat Gulia, Adv. Mr. Bishwajit Bhattacharyya, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sahil Tagotra, AOR Dr. Arvind S. Avhad, AOR Mr. R. Balasubramanium, Sr. Adv. (N/P) Mr. Abhigya Kushwah, AOR Mr. Akhilesh Kumar Shrivastava, Adv. Mrs. Sunita Yadav, Adv. Mr. Akash Sharma, Adv.
CONMT.PET.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 Etc. Mr. Rishav Ranjan, Adv. Mr. Debashish Mishra, Adv. Ms. Sujatha Bagadhi, Adv. Ms. Sanya Minhas, Adv. Mr. Pradeep Kumar Dubey, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Rajkumar Murarka, Adv. Mr. Rohan Rohatgi, Adv. Mrs. Shubhangini Rohatgi, Adv. Mr. Ravindra Kumar Gupta, Adv. Mrs. Shally Bhasin, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Prashant Kumar, AOR Mrs. Shally Bhasin, AOR Mr. Siddharth Dave, Sr. Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, AOR Mr. Yajat Gulia, Adv. Ms. Arundhati Mukherjee, Adv. Mr. N. Venkataraman, A.S.G. Mrs. V. C. Bharathi, Adv. Mr. Merusagar Samantaray, Adv. Mr. Saransh Kumar, Adv. Mr. Bharat Sood, Adv. Ms. Nachiketa Joshi, Adv. Mr. T. S.sabarish, Adv. Mr. Amrish Kumar, AOR Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Mr. V. Giri, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Mr. B. M. Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv. Mr. Devanshu Yadav, Adv. Mr. Sameer Pandey, Adv. Mr. Yajat Gulia, Adv. Mr. Sahil Sharma, Adv. Mr. Rishabh Parikh, Adv. Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Ms. Rao Vishwaja, Adv. Mr. Rahul Narang, Adv. Mr. Harshed Sundar, Adv. Mr. Nihar Dharmadhikari, Adv.
CONMT.PET.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 Etc. Mr. Rohan Thawani, Adv. Ms. Pooja Dhar, AOR Ms. S. Ambica, Adv. M/s. K J John And Co, AOR Ms. Supriya Juneja, AOR Mr. Aniruddha Deshmukh, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv. Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR Mr. Bharat Bagla, Adv. Mr. Sourav Singh, Adv. Mr. Aditya Krishna, Adv. Ms. Preet S. Phanse, Adv. Mr. Adarsh Dubey, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Agrawal, AOR Mr. Sahil Tagotra, AOR Mr. Preshit Vilas Surshe, AOR Mr. Sahil Jodhwani, Adv. Mr. Tarun Kumar, Adv. Mr. Satyajit A. Desai, Adv. Mr. Abhinav K. Mutyalwar, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Gautam, Adv. Mr. Sachin Singh, Adv. Ms. Anagha S. Desai, AOR Ms. Jasmine Damkewala, AOR Ms. Vaishali Sharma, Adv. Mr. Divyam Khera, Adv. Mr. Vinay Kumar Mudgal, Adv. Mr. Vibhuti Sushant Gupta, Adv. Mr. Devang Mudgal, Adv. Mr. Narender Kumar Verma, AOR Mrs. Pragya Baghel, AOR Ms. Anuradha Mutatkar, AOR Mr. Divakar Kumar, AOR Mr. Manoj K. Mishra, AOR Mr. Umesh Dubey, Adv. Mr. Mithilesh Kumar Mishra, Adv. Ms. Madhulika, Adv. Ms. Vuzmal Nehru, Adv.
CONMT.PET.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 Etc. Mr. Amulya, Adv. Mr. C. George Thomas, AOR Dr. Yusuf Iqbal Yusuf, Adv. Mr. Bhavya Sethi, Adv. Ms. Gyanika Kochar, Adv. Mr. Mohd. Abid Sheikh, Adv. Ms. Neelam Singh, AOR Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR Mr. Ravindra Keshavrao Adsure, AOR Mr. Yash Prashant Sonavane, Adv. Mr. Sagar N.pahune Patil, Adv. Ms. Nikita Vilas Borde-patil, Adv. Mr. Abinash Kumar Mishra, AOR Mr. Pranaya Goyal, AOR Mr. Himanshu Shekhar, AOR Mr. M. L. Lahoty, Adv. Mr. Paban K Sharma, Adv. Mr. Anchit Sripat, Adv. Mr. Pranab Kumar Nayak, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar, Adv. Mr. Vishal Prasad, AOR Mr. Kunal Cheema, AOR Mr. N Venkataraman, A.S.G. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR Mr. V C Bharathi, Adv. Ms. Rekha Pandey, Adv. Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv. Mr. P V Yogeswaran, Adv. Mrs. Chitrangda Rastaravara, Adv. Mr. Raman Yadav, Adv. Mr. Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General(N/P) Mr. N Venkatraman, A.S.G. Mr. Rana Mukerjee, Sr. Adv. Mr. Raj Bahadur Yadav Aor, Adv. Mr. Venkatraman Chandrashekhara Bharathi, Adv. Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv. Mr. P V Yogeshwaran, Adv. Mr. Kanu Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Raj Bahadur Yadav, AOR Mr. Kaushal Yadav, AOR
CONMT.PET.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 Etc. Mr. Amol Nirmalkumar Suryawanshi, AOR Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AOR UPON hearing the counsel, the Court made the following O R D E R We have heard the learned Senior Advocates for the parties at some length. On behalf of M/s. Sahara India Real Estate Corporation Limited 9 and M/s. Sahara Housing Investment Corporation Limited 10 , an attempt was made for us to reconsider the orders dated 31.08.2012 11 , 05.12.2012 12 and 19.06.2015. In our opinion, besides being impermissible, no reasons and grounds are made out for us to reconsider these orders and the directions therein, including the directions given in paragraph 326 of the order dated 31.08.2012. The orders have attained finality. Review viz. the order dated 31.08.2012 was dismissed on 08.01.2013. The correctness of the findings and the directions given therein cannot be repeatedly challenged and questioned. The arguments and contentions raised were specifically examined in great depth and detail vide order dated 05.12.2012. Attempts made to reargue these issues were also rejected on 19.06.2015. Vide order dated 31.01.2019 as well, this Court had noted that the conduct of the contemnors does not inspire confidence, or reflect the intention to 9 For short “SIRECL”. 10 For short “SHICL”. 11 Sahara India Real Estate Corp. Ltd. & Ors vs Securities & Exch. Board Of India & Anr. reported in (2013) 1 SCC 1. 12 Sahara India Real Estate Corp. Ltd. & Ors vs Securities & Exch. Board Of India & Anr. reported in (2013) 2 SCC 733.
CONMT.PET.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 Etc. deposit the amount payable. The Securities Exchange Board of India 13 has filed the 23 rd Status Report. We give an opportunity to SIRECL and SHICL, and the erstwhile and the present directors of the said companies to file objections to the said report within a period of four weeks from today. Response to the said objections will be filed within four weeks after service of the objections by SEBI and the office of the amicus curiae . As per SEBI, 15,77,67,000/- (Rupees fifteen crore seventy₹ seven lakhs sixty seven thousand only) (as on 31.03.2024) are available on deposit in the SEBI Sahara Refund Account. This figure is disputed on behalf of SIRECL and SHICL. It will be open to the authorized representatives of the companies to get in touch with SEBI and get the issue related to the accounts settled. As per order dated 31.08.2012, the principal amount payable is 24,029.73 crore,₹ 14 even if at this stage we do not go into the question of interest. The aspect of interest will be considered at an appropriate time. It is suggested on behalf of the Sahara Group of Companies that they may be given four weeks’ time to enter into a Joint Venture 15 or Development Agreement with regard to the land situated at Versova, Mumbai, Maharashtra. We accept this suggestion as a last and final opportunity, and direct that within the said period 13 For sort “SEBI”. 14 There appears to be some dispute about the figure of the principal amount. It is stated on behalf of SEBI that the total principal amount due and payable to the depositors is ₹ 25,781.32 crore. We are not, for the time being, deciding this issue. 15 For short, “JV”.
CONMT.PET.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 Etc. of four weeks, they shall seek prior approval of this Court for executing the JV/Development Agreement. Further, an amount of 1,000 crore will be deposited along with the application seeking₹ approval of this Court for the JV/Development Agreement for the land at Versova. The agreement must state the details of the payments, date of payment etc. which will be deposited in the SEBI Sahara Refund Account. The balance principal amount should be deposited within a period of nine months. Thus, the Sahara Group of Companies may pursue negotiations for the JV/Development Agreement. The execution, however, will require prior approval of this Court. The amount of 1,000 crore, which will be deposited by a third₹ party, will be kept in an escrow account. In case this Court does not grant an approval for the JV/Development Agreement, the amount will be refunded to the said third party. In case the JV/Development Agreement is not entered into within a period of four weeks from today, this Court will undertake the sale of the Versova land on “as is where is” basis. We also permit the Sahara Group of Companies to enter into the JV/Development Agreement with regard to the other properties. The Sahara Group of Companies shall seek prior approval/permission of this Court before finalising any such JV/Development Agreement and creating any third-party rights. By orders dated 03.09.2024, 04.09.2024 and 05.09.2024, we have permitted initiation and continuation of legal proceedings against Sahara Group of Companies. Sale of any immovable property belonging to Sahara Group of Companies will comply with the mandate with regard to circle rate, and in case sale consideration is less/below
CONMT.PET.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 Etc. 10% of the circle rate, prior permission of this Court will be taken. The sale consideration would be deposited in the SEBI Sahara Refund Account. Liberty is granted to Sahara Group of Companies, as well as the third parties, to move an application before this Court for release of payment from the SEBI Sahara Refund Account. The direction given in the order dated 06.05.2016 regarding deployment of Delhi Police officials, is hereby recalled/withdrawn. The Registry will not entertain any application, objection or status report filed by any party or third party, without service thereof on the Advocate-on-Record for SEBI, SIRECL and SHICL, and the office of the learned amicus curiae 16 . Physical copy, as well as e-copy of the application/objection/status report will be served/filed. Liberty to mention the matter is granted to the parties. Re-list after one month. Writ Petition (C) No. 877/2018 Re-list after one month. I.A. No. 122/2015, 244/2016, 205/2016, 148/2016, 174/2016, 180- 182/2016, 185/2016, 196/2016, 284/2017, 268/2017, 47681/2017 and 60598/2017 It is stated that these applications have become infructuous. The same are dismissed as infructuous. 16 shekharnaphade.amicus@gmail.com (email ID of the office of learned Amicus Curiae ).
CONMT.PET.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 Etc. I.A. No. 83-85/2015 Re-list after one month. I.A. Nos. 63773/2018 and 137135/2018 Notwithstanding the pendency of the present proceedings and the order(s) passed herein, all proceedings can continue in accordance with law. The application is disposed of accordingly. We clarify that we have not made any comments on merits. All pleas and contentions are left open. I.A. No. 129469/2018 Re-list after one month. I.A. No. 74012/2018 Re-list after one month. I.A. No. 30932/2018 Notwithstanding the pendency of the present proceedings and the order(s) passed herein, all proceedings can continue in accordance with law. The application is disposed of accordingly. We clarify that we have not made any comments on merits. All pleas and contentions are left open. I.A. No. 56231/2018 In view of the statement made by the learned Senior Advocate appearing for SEBI, the present application has become infructuous. The application is accordingly dismissed as infructuous.
CONMT.PET.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 Etc. I.A. Nos. 58012/2018 and 138094/2018 No orders are required to be passed in these applications and the same will be treated as disposed of. I.A. No. 134546/2018 Re-list after one month. I.A. No. 176906/2022 Notwithstanding the pendency of the present proceedings and the order(s) passed herein, all proceedings can continue in accordance with law. The application is disposed of accordingly. We clarify that we have not made any comments on merits. All pleas and contentions are left open. I.A. Nos. 88529/2023 and 88532/2023 Re-list after one month. In the meanwhile, SEBI will file its response/reply to the applications within three weeks from today. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, will be filed within one week after service of the response/reply. I.A. Nos. 191447/2023 and 6292/2024 Notwithstanding the pendency of the present proceedings and the order(s) passed herein, all proceedings can continue in accordance with law. We clarify that we have not made any comments on merits. All pleas and contentions are left open.
CONMT.PET.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 Etc. The application is disposed of accordingly. I.A. No. 182815/2024 Re-list after one month. I.A. Nos. 31-33/2014 In view of the statement made by the learned Senior Advocate appearing for SEBI, the present application has become infructuous. The application is accordingly dismissed as infructuous. I.A. No. 104/2015 Re-list after one month. I.A. No. 218/2016 In view of the statement made by the learned Senior Advocate appearing for SEBI, the present application has become infructuous. The application is accordingly dismissed as infructuous. I.A. No. 88721/2017 Re-list after one month. I.A. No. 49580/2017 In view of the statement made by the learned Senior Advocate appearing for SEBI, the present application has become infructuous. The application is accordingly dismissed as infructuous. I.A. No. 118234/2020 Re-list after one month. I. A. No. 78626/2021, 48440/2024 and 188847/2024 These applications are allowed, subject to all just
CONMT.PET.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 Etc. exceptions. I.A. No. 136394/2018 Re-list after one month. In the meanwhile, reply will be filed by the non-applicant(s) within three weeks from today. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, will be filed within one week. from the date of service of the reply. I.A. No. 109345/2022 Re-list after one month. In the meanwhile, reply will be filed by the non-applicant(s) within three weeks from today. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, will be filed within one week. I.A. No. 119572/2023 The documents are taken on record. Application is accordingly disposed of. I.A. No. 68141/2024 Re-list after one month. In the meanwhile, it will be open to SIRECL and SHICL to file reply to the objections/complaints enclosed with the application within three weeks from today, with a copy to the complainant, who may file response within seven days from the date of service. I.A. No. 188912/2024 Issue notice to the non-applicant(s). Notice will be served by all modes, including dasti.
CONMT.PET.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 Etc. Reply will be filed by the non-applicant(s) within three weeks from today. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, will be filed within one week. Re-list after one month. (DEEPAK GUGLANI) (BABITA PANDEY) (R.S. NARAYANAN) AR-CUM-PS COURT MASTER (SH) ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
Cont. Pet. (C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. ITEM NO.1 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CONMT.PET.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 IN CONMT.PET.(C) No. 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9833/2011 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUBRATA ROY SAHARA AND ORS. & ORS. Respondent(s) (IA No. 147567/2023 - APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION, IA No. 159484/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 27489/2023 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS,,IA No. 55526/2018 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS,,IA No. 78070/2023 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/ DIRECTIONS,,IA No. 160131/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 54042/2023 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 172867/2022 – CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION, IA No. 161884/2022 – CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION, IA No. 50405/2018 – CLARIFICATION/ DIRECTION, IA No. 50393/2018 – CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION, IA No. 159473/2022 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION, IA No. 27488/2023 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION, IA No. 65863/2018 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION, IA No. 78069/2023 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION, IA No. 50392/2018 – INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT, IA No. 16794/2020 – INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT, IA No. 182909/2022 – INTERVENTION/ IMPLEADMENT, IA No. 183801/2023 – INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT, IA No. 161889/2022 – INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT, IA No. 55525/2018 – INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT, IA No. 160124/2022 – INTERVENTION/ IMPLEADMENT and IA No. 54040/2023 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT) WITH CONMT.PET.(C) No. 260/2013 In C.A. No. 8643/2012 (XVII) (IA No. 136343/2018 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS and IA No. 102871/2019 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT) R.P.(Crl.) No. 458/2014 In W.P.(Crl.) No. 57/2014 (X) (IA No. 14799/2014 - APPLICATION FOR INSPECTION OF FILE) T.C.(C) No. 87/2014 (III-A) W.P.(C) No. 1424/2019 (X) W.P.(C) No. 1123/2020 (X) (FOR ADMISSION) 1
Cont. Pet. (C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. W.P.(C) No. 1427/2020 (X) (IA No. 7256/2022 - EARLY HEARING APPLICATION) W.P.(C) No. 1333/2020 (X) (FOR ADMISSION) Diary No. 26472/2020 (XVII) C.A. Nos. 7443-7444/2021 (XVII) (IA No. 159618/2021 - STAY APPLICATION) W.P.(C) No. 312/2022 (X) (FOR ADMISSION) W.P.(C) No. 284/2022 (X) (FOR ADMISSION) CONMT.PET.(C) No. 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9833/2011 (XVII) (IA No. 1/2013 - STAY APPLICATION) CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 (XVII) (IA No. 183/2016 - APP FOR PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS, IA No. 68897/2024 - APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION, IA No. 194846/2024 - APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION, IA No. 58117/2020 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 95547/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/ DIRECTIONS, IA No. 203485/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 30932/2018 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 52680/2020 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 35238/2021 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 71965/2021 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/ DIRECTIONS, IA No. 7215/2023 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 114427/2017 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 138094/2018 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 43715/2020 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 24886/2021 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/ DIRECTIONS, IA No. 202750/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 203523/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 136394/2021 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 68141/2024 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 49580/2017 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/ DIRECTIONS, IA No. 44866/2021 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 203516/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 88532/2023 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 48440/2024 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 47681/2017 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/ DIRECTIONS, IA No. 88721/2017 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 123978/2017 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 166294/2019 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 130199/2020 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 176906/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/ DIRECTIONS, IA No. 6292/2024 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 87599/2017 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 163394/2019 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 118234/2020 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 44861/2021 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/ DIRECTIONS, IA No. 99284/2021 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA 2
Cont. Pet. (C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. No. 169125/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 203490/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 191447/2023 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 188912/2024 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/ DIRECTIONS, IA No. 41948/2021 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 78626/2021 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 109345/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 188847/2024 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 10494/2019 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/ DIRECTIONS, IA No. 260/2017 – CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION, IA No. 87559/2017 – CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION, IA No. 69648/2018 – CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION, IA No. 160939/2018 – CLARIFICATION/ DIRECTION, IA No. 142662/2023 – CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION, IA No. 18940/2018 – CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION, IA No. 1446/2022 – CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION, IA No. 131658/2023 – CLARIFICATION/ DIRECTION, IA No. 11181/2018 – CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION, IA No. 63773/2018 – CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION, IA No. 137135/2018 – CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION, IA No. 58012/2018 – CLARIFICATION/ DIRECTION, IA No. 134546/2018 – CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION, IA No. 91335/2019 – CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION, IA No. 193416/2022 – CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION, IA No. 56231/2018 – CLARIFICATION/ DIRECTION, IA No. 123268/2017 – CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION, IA No. 78376/2018 – CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION, IA No. 48235/2018 – CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION, IA No. 40383/2023 – CLARIFICATION/ DIRECTION, IA No. 115237/2017 – CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION, IA No. 74012/2018 – CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION, IA No. 97945/2019 - EARLY HEARING, APPLICATION, IA No. 44867/2021 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING AFFIDAVIT, IA No. 44863/2021 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING AFFIDAVIT, IA No. 142664/2023 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T., IA No. 99230/2019 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T., IA No. 25/2014 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T., IA No. 48237/2018 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T., IA No. 87565/2017 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T., IA No. 115238/2017 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T., IA No. 60598/2017 - EXTENSION OF TIME IA No. 110/2015 - EXTENSION OF TIME, IA No. 227/2016 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION, IA No. 283/2017 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION, IA No. 99229/2019 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION, IA No. 71960/2021 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION, IA No. 144/2016 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION, IA No. 194/2016 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION, IA No. 278/2017 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION, IA No. 55138/2017 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION, IA No. 123984/2017 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION, IA No. 99712/2021 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION, IA No. 232/2016 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION, IA No. 22/2014 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION, IA No. 231/2016 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION, IA No. 78372/2018 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION, IA No. 22814/2019 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION, IA No. 228/2016 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION, IA No. 136758/2019 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION, IA No. 41944/2021 – INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT, IA No. 71987/2021 – INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT, IA No. 37708/2023 – INTERVENTION/ IMPLEADMENT, IA No. 115235/2017 – INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT, IA No. 95545/2022 – INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT, IA No. 203484/2022 – INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT, IA No. 145099/2024 – INTERVENTION/ IMPLEADMENT, IA No. 69646/2018 – INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT, IA No. 114416/2017 – INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT, IA No. 16501/2021 – 3
Cont. Pet. (C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT, IA No. 202747/2022 – INTERVENTION/ IMPLEADMENT, IA No. 203520/2022 – INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT, IA No. 110821/2017 – INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT, IA No. 43479/2020 – INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT, IA No. 7584/2021 – INTERVENTION/ IMPLEADMENT, IA No. 90828/2019 – INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT, IA No. 203515/2022 – INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT, IA No. 88529/2023 – INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT, IA No. 32764/2019 – INTERVENTION/ IMPLEADMENT, IA No. 163389/2019 – INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT, IA No. 116947/2020 – INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT, IA No. 203489/2022 – INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT, IA No. 142671/2023 – INTERVENTION/ IMPLEADMENT, IA No. 87563/2017 – INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT, IA No. 48224/2018 – INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT, IA No. 182815/2024 - MODIFICATION OF COURT ORDER, IA No. 123051/2021 - MODIFICATION OF COURT ORDER, IA No. 129469/2018 - MODIFICATION OF COURT ORDER, IA No. 56/2015 - MODIFICATION OF COURT ORDER, IA No. 119572/2023 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES, IA No. 78121/2023 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES, IA No. 233/2016 - PERMISSION TO FILE ANNEXURES, IA No. 47133/2017 - PERMISSION TO PLACE ON RECORD SUBSEQUENT FACTS, IA No. 28/2014 - RELEASE OF THE PETITIONER) T.C.(C) No. 83/2014 (XVII) T.C.(C) No. 86/2014 (XVII) T.C.(C) No. 84/2014 (XVII) T.C.(C) No. 85/2014 (XVII) C.A. Nos. 7152-7153/2016 (XVII-A) (IA No. 23883/2024 - APPLICATION FOR SETTLEMENT, IA No. 122100/2020 - APPLICATION FOR SUBSTITUTION, IA No. 122101/2020 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 172155/2023 - EARLY HEARING APPLICATION and IA No. 72714/2022 - RELEASE OF THE FIXED DEPOSIT) C.A. Nos. 9224-9225/2016 (XVII-A) MA Nos. 1364-1365/2017 in C.A. No. 9813/2011 (XVII) (IA No. 123568/2017 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS) W.P.(C) No. 877/2018 (X) (IA No. 96025/2020 - APPLICATION FOR TAGGING/DETAGGING) W.P.(C) No. 1459/2019 (X) W.P.(C) No. 147/2024 (X) CONMT.PET.(C) Nos. 55-57/2016 IN CONMT.PET.(C) no. 413/2012, CONMT.PET.(C) no. 260/2013 @ CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 (XVII) 4
Cont. Pet. (C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. Date : 04-09-2024 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. SUNDRESH HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE BELA M. TRIVEDI Amicus Curie Mr. Shekhar Naphade, Sr. Advocate Ms. Fauzia Shakil, AOR Ms. Salonee Paranjape, Adv. Ms. Farah Hashmi, Adv. Ms. Aishwarya Dash, Adv. Mr. Karan Bishnoi, Adv. Mr. Shivansh Saxena, Adv. Ms. Tasmiya Taleha, Adv. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Rohan Thawani, Adv. Ms. Pooja Dhar, AOR Ms. S. Ambica, Adv. Ms. Sujata Kurdukar, AOR Mr. Gautam Talukdar, AOR Mr. Bishwajit Bhattacharyya, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sahil Tagotra, AOR Dr. Arvind S. Avhad, AOR Mr. R. Balasubramanian, Sr. Adv. Mr. Abhigya Kushwah, AOR Mr. Akhilesh Kumar Shrivastava, Adv. Mrs. Sunita Yadav, Adv. Mr. Akash Sharma, Adv. Mr. Rishav Ranjan, Adv. Mr. Debashish Mishra, Adv. Ms. Sujatha Bagadhi, Adv. Ms. Sanya Minhas, Adv. Mr. Pradeep Kumar Dubey, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Rajkumar Murarka, Adv. Mr. Rohan Rohatgi, Adv. Mrs. Shubhangini Rohatgi, Adv. Mr. Ravindra Kumar Gupta, Adv. Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Sr. Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Shreyash Kumar, Adv. 5
Cont. Pet. (C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. M/s. K.J. John And Co., AOR Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR Mrs. Shally Bhasin, AOR For Respondent(s)/ Applicant(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Mr. V. Giri, Sr. Adv. Mr. Arvind Nayar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR Mr. B.M. Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv. Mr. Devanshu Yadav, Adv. Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav, Adv. Mr. Sameer Pandey, Adv. Mr. Yajat Gulia, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Mr. Sahil Sharma, Adv. Mr. Rishabh Parikh, Adv. Ms. Rao Vishwaja, Adv. Mr. Rahul Narang, Adv. Mr. Harshed Sundar, Adv. Mr. Nihar Dharmadhikari, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, AOR Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Yajat Gulia, Adv. Mr. Amrish Kumar, AOR Mr. Rohan Thawani, Adv. Ms. Pooja Dhar, AOR Ms. S. Ambica, Adv. M/s. K.J. John And Co, AOR Mr. Prashant Kumar, AOR Mrs. Shally Bhasin, AOR Ms. Supriya Juneja, AOR Mr. Aniruddha Deshmukh, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv. Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR 6
Cont. Pet. (C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. Mr. Bharat Bagla, Adv. Mr. Sourav Singh, Adv. Mr. Aditya Krishna, Adv. Ms. Preet S. Phanse, Adv. Mr. Adarsh Dubey, Adv. Mr. Preshit Vilas Surshe, AOR Mr. Satyajit A. Desai, Adv. Mr. Abhinav K. Mutyalwar, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Gautam, Adv. Mr. Sachin Singh, Adv. Ms. Anagha S. Desai, AOR Ms. Jasmine Damkewala, AOR Ms. Vaishali Sharma, Adv. Mr. Divyam Khera, Adv. Mr. Advait Joshi, Adv. Mr. Vinay Kumar Mudgal, Adv. Mr. Vibhuti Sushant Gupta, Adv. Mr. Devang Mudgal, Adv. Mr. Narender Kumar Verma, AOR Mrs. Pragya Baghel, AOR Mr. Vishal Banshal, Adv. Mr. S.N. Bhat, Sr. Adv. Mr. D.P. Chaturvedi, Adv. Mr. Tarun Kumar Thakur, Adv. Ms. Parvati Bhat, Adv. Mr. Abhay Choudhary M., Adv. Mr. Vivek Ram R, Adv. Ms. Anuradha Mutatkar, AOR Mr. Krishan Khurana, Adv. Mr. Sumant Dey, Adv. Mr. Rohit Khurana, Adv. Mr. Alsamad Quereshi, Adv. Mr. Divakar Kumar, AOR Mr. Manoj K. Mishra, AOR Mr. Umesh Dubey, Adv. Mr. Mithilesh Kumar Mishra, Adv. Ms. Madhulika, Adv. Ms. Vuzmal Nehru, Adv. Mr. Amulya, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Agrawal, Sr. Adv. Mr. Omkar Geedh, Adv. 7
Cont. Pet. (C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. Mr. C. George Thomas, AOR Dr. Yusuf Iqbal Yusuf, Adv. Mr. Bhavya Sethi, Adv. Ms. Gyanika Kochar, Adv. Mr. Mohd. Abid Sheikh, Adv. Ms. Neelam Singh, AOR Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR Mr. Ravindra Keshavrao Adsure, AOR Mr. Sachin Patil, Adv. Mr. Yash Prashant Sonavane, Adv. Mr. Sagar N. Pahune Patil, Adv. Mr. Swati Jagtap, Adv. Ms. Nikita B. Patil, Adv. Mr. A.P.S. Ahluwalia, Sr. Adv. Mr. S.S. Ahluwalia, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kumar Pandey, Adv. Mr. Mohit Kumar Sharma, Adv. Mr. Madhu Kumari, Adv. Mr. Abinash Kumar Mishra, AOR Ms. Menaka Guruswamy, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pranaya Goyal, AOR Mr. Chiranjivi Sharma, Adv. Ms. Shachi Udeshi, Adv. Ms. Nehal Gupta, Adv. Mr. Vasu Gupta, Adv. Mr. Utkarsh Pratap, Adv. Mr. Devadipta Das, Adv. Ms. Arunima Das, Adv. Mr. M.L. Lahoty, Adv. Mr. Paban K. Sharma, Adv. Mr. Anchit Sripat, Adv. Mr. Pranab Kumar Nayak, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar, Adv. Mr. Himanshu Shekhar, AOR Ms. Rukhmini Bobde, Adv. Ms. Soumya Priyadarshinee, Adv. Mr. Amit Kumar Srivastava, Adv. Mr. Amlaan Kumar, Adv. Mr. Vinayak Aren, Adv. Mr. Vishal Prasad, AOR Mr. Kunal Cheema, AOR 8
Cont. Pet. (C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR Mr. Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General (N/P) Mr. N. Venkatraman, A.S.G. Mr. Rana Mukerjee, Sr. Adv. Mr. Raj Bahadur Yadav Aor, Adv. Mr. Venkatraman Chandrashekhara Bharathi, Adv. Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv. Mr. P.V. Yogeshwaran, Adv. Mr. Kanu Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Raj Bahadur Yadav, AOR Mr. Kaushal Yadav, AOR Mr. Amol Nirmalkumar Suryawanshi, AOR Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AOR Mr. Gaurav Agrawal, AOR Mr. Sahil Tagotra, AOR Mr. Ranjit Kumar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Prasenjit Keswani, Sr. Adv. Mr. Debmalya Chandra Banerjee, Adv. Ms. Tahira Karanjawala, Adv. Mr. Kartik Bhatnagar, Adv. Mr. Rohan Sharma, Adv. Mr. Arjun Sharma, Adv. Mr. Agastya Shelat, Adv. Ms. Apurva Rajora, Adv. Ms. Sukanya Das, Adv. Mr. Aman Mehta, Adv. M/s. Karanjawala & Co., AOR Mr. Sudhanshu S. Choudhari, Sr. Adv. Ms. Pranjal Chapalgaonkar, Adv. Ms. Deeplaxmi S. Matwankar, Adv./AOR Mr. Sudhanshu S. Choudhari, Sr. Adv. Ms. Pratap Nimbalkar, Adv. Ms. Deeplaxmi S. Matwankar, Adv./AOR Mr. Sandeep Bajaj, Adv./AOR Mr. Aditya Chopra, Adv. Mr. Mayank Bayan, Adv. Mr. Devraj Bhargava, Adv. Mr. Amitabh Chaturvedi, Adv. Ms. Rakhi Ray, Adv./AOR 9
Cont. Pet. (C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. Mr. B.L.N. Sanjit, Adv. Mr. Ajit Kumar Sinha, Sr. Adv. Mr. Shekhar Prit Jha, Adv./AOR Ms. Preeti Kumari, Adv. Mr. Ratnakar Dash, Sr. Adv. Mr. G. Sivabalamurugan, Adv. Mr. Selvaraj Mahendran, Adv. Mr. C. Adhikesavan, Adv. Mr. P. V. Harikrishnan, Adv. Mr. C. Kavin Ananth, Adv. Mr. Amar Dave, Sr. Adv. Mr. Himanshu Satija, Adv. Mrs. Neha Mehta Satija, Adv. Mr. Shevaaz Khan, Adv. Mr. Prasenjit Keswani, Sr. Adv. Mr. Upamanyu Tewari, Adv. Mrs. V.D. Khanna, Adv./AOR UPON hearing the counsel, the Court made the following O R D E R I. A. Nos. 91335/2019 and 90828/2019 I.A. No. 90828/2019 for impleadment is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Assertions made in the present application are devoid of details and the particulars about the amount due and payable, as well as, whether the properties of the companies in question have been sold, and the sale proceeds deposited in the Securities and Exchange Board of India 1 Sahara Refund Account. It will be open to the applicant(s) to file a fresh application with full details and particulars to enable the Court to decide the claim and prayer of the applicant(s). I.A. No. 91335/2019 is disposed of accordingly. 1 For short, “SEBI”. 10
Cont. Pet. (C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. I.A. No. 166294/2019 In view of the explanation given in the Court today, we allow the present application directing SEBI to release and handover all the original and other title documents of the land in question situated at village Rajavali, Taluka – Vasai, District – Palghar, Maharashtra to M/s. Conceptual Advisory Services LLP, in whose favour the sale deed has been executed. However, we clarify that we have not gone into any question relating to the inter-se transactions between M/s. Conceptual Advisory Services LLP, Sai Rydam Realtors Private Limited and Prime Downtown Estates Private Limited. The order of this Court will not be read as approving or making any comments on the inter-se transactions between M/s. Conceptual Advisory Services LLP, Sai Rydam Realtors Private Limited and Prime Downtown Estates Private Limited. The application is disposed of. I.A. Nos. 99229/2019 and 99230/2019 I.A. No. 99229/2019 for intervention is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The companies in question, which have to pay the amount, will file an affidavit with SEBI stating whether any of the assets of the said companies have been sold, the sale proceeds and the amount, deposited in the SEBI Sahara Refund Account. In case, the sale proceeds have been deposited in the SEBI 11
Cont. Pet. (C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. Sahara Refund Account on the sale of any of the assets of the company in question, the same will be paid to the employees/applicants towards the principal amount of unpaid salary along with simple interest at the rate of 12 percent per annum. I.A. No. 99230/2019 is disposed of in the above terms. I.A. No. 16794/2020 It is stated that the present application has become infructuous. Accordingly, the same is dismissed as infructuous. I.A. No. 116947/2020 and 116949/2020 In view of the order dt. 08.02.2021 allowing the withdrawal of I.A. No. 116949/2020, I.A. No. 116947/2020 for impleadment is disposed of. Notwithstanding the pendency of the present proceedings and order dated 07.02.2018, the applicant(s) are permitted to take recourse to appropriate remedies as available to them in law. We make no comments on the merits. All pleas and contentions are left open. I.A. No. 7584/2021 Re-list tomorrow, that is, on 05.09.2024. I.A. Nos. 16501/2021 and 24886/2021 Re-list tomorrow, that is, on 05.09.2024. 12
Cont. Pet. (C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. I.A. Nos. 27488/2023 and 27489/2023 I.A. No. 27488/2023 for intervention/impleadment is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Notwithstanding the pendency of the present proceedings and order dated 07.02.2018, the applicant(s) are permitted to take recourse to appropriate remedies as available to them in law. I.A. No. 27489/2023 is accordingly disposed of. We make no comments on the merits. All pleas and contentions are left open. I.A. Nos. 99284/2021 and 99712/2021 I.A. 99712/2021 for intervention is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. In view of the subsequent orders passed by this Court, the attachment order dated 13.02.2013 passed by SEBI is no longer in operation. However, we make no comments on the substantive issue, and it will be open to the applicant(s) to raise the said contention before the appropriate forum/court in accordance with law. We clarify that all pleas and contentions of the applicant(s), as well as, M/s Sahara Prime City Limited are left open. I.A. No. 99284/2021 is disposed of accordingly. I.A. Nos. 71960/2021, 71965/2021 and 71987/2021 13
Cont. Pet. (C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. I.A. Nos. 71960/2021 and 71987/201 for intervention/impleadment are allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Notwithstanding the orders passed by this Court, we are not inclined to entertain the present application(s), but leave it open to the applicant(s), who espouses a public cause, to approach appropriate court/forum in accordance with law. We clarify that we have not examined any pleas and contentions including the question of the right of the applicant(s) to invoke public interest litigation jurisdiction or a class action suit. I.A. No. 71965/2021 is disposed of accordingly. I.A. Nos. 159484/2022 and 159473/2022 I.A. No. 159473/2022 for intervention/impleadment is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. It is stated that the applicant(s) have already filed civil proceedings, which are pending. Notwithstanding the pendency of the present proceedings and order dated 07.02.2018, the civil proceedings can continue in accordance with law. I.A. No. 159484/2022 is disposed of accordingly. We clarify that we have not commented on merits. All pleas and contentions of the parties are left open. I.A. Nos. 160131/2022 and 160124/2022 14
Cont. Pet. (C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. I.A. No. 160121/2022 for intervention/impleadment is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Notwithstanding the pendency of the present proceedings and order dated 07.02.2018, the applicant(s) are permitted to take recourse to appropriate remedies as available to them in law. I.A. No.160124/2022 is disposed of accordingly. We make no comments on the merits. All pleas and contentions are left open. I.A. No. 203520, 203523, 203515, 203516, 203490, 203489, 203484, 203485, 202747 and 202750 of 2022 The applicant(s) and the Aamby Valley Limited will file affidavits enclosing therewith relevant documents with regard to the purported work undertaken by the applicant(s), which will include the contract, details of the payment made, measurement book or work-book maintained by the contractor, details of the employees engaged by them and the date of commencement and completion of work. A copy of the said affidavits along with documents will be furnished to Mr. Shekhar Naphade, Sr. Advocate ( Amicus Curiae ), for consideration and examination. SEBI will nominate an Officer, who shall provide aid and assistance to the learned Amicus Curiae in ascertaining the facts and the assertions made in the affidavits and documents. Learned Amicus Curiae will be at liberty to engage services of an advocate to undertake local site inspection for ascertaining 15
Cont. Pet. (C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. the work undertaken. If any such exercise is required, the advocate nominated by the learned Amicus Curiae will be paid 1,00,000/-₹ (Rupees one lakh only) plus out-of-pocket expenses including travel and stay expenses. The payment will be made out of SEBI Sahara Refund Account. Re-list after four months. I.A. No. 1446/2022 The application is disposed of permitting the applicant(s) to raise all pleas and contentions before the appropriate forum/court. We clarify that we have not made any comments on the contentions and pleas raised by either side, that is, the applicant(s) or M/s Sahara Prime City Limited. I.A. No. 169125/2022 The present application is dismissed. I.A. No. 204097/2022 This is an application for impleadment. None appears for the applicant(s). It appears that the applicant(s) had made some deposit with the Sahara Credit Cooperative Society Limited. The application is dismissed in default. However, it will be open to the applicant(s) to raise his grievance in accordance with law before the appropriate 16
Cont. Pet. (C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. forum/court. We clarify that we have not commented on the merits. All pleas and contentions are left open. I.A. Nos. 161889/2022 and 161884/2022 I.A. No. 161889/2022 for intervention/impleadment is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Notwithstanding the pendency of the present proceedings and order dated 07.02.2018, the applicant(s) are permitted to take recourse to appropriate remedies in accordance with law. I.A. No. 161884/2022 is accordingly disposed of. We make no comments on the merits. All pleas and contentions are left open. I.A. Nos. 54040/2023 and 54042/2023 I.A. No. 54040/2023 for impleadment is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Notwithstanding the pendency of the present proceedings and order dated 07.02.2018, the applicant(s) are permitted to take recourse to appropriate remedies in accordance with law. I.A. No. 54042/2023 is accordingly disposed of. We make no comments on the merits. All pleas and contentions are left open. I.A. Nos. 142662/2023, 142671/2023 and 68897/2024 Learned counsel for the applicant(s) seeks permission to 17
Cont. Pet. (C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. withdraw I.A. No. 68897/2024. In view of the statement made, I.A. No. 68897/2024 is dismissed as withdrawn. Accordingly, I.A. Nos. 142662/2023 and 142671/2023 will be treated as disposed of. I.A. No. 131658/2023 Notwithstanding the pendency of the present proceedings, the applicant(s) are permitted to take recourse to appropriate remedies as available to them in law. The application is disposed of accordingly. We make no comments on the merits. All pleas and contentions are left open. I.A. Nos. 112083/2024, 112084/2024, 112086/2024 and 112089/2024 Learned Senior Advocate appearing for the applicant(s) seeks permission to withdraw the present application as he has a remedy and right to initiate or continue with civil proceedings, if not already initiated. Recording the aforesaid, the applications are dismissed as withdrawn. I.A. Nos. 145301/2024 and 145099/2024 These are applications for impleadment. We are not inclined to pass any order in the present applications, but leave it open to the applicant(s) to take recourse to appropriate remedies in accordance with law. The 18
Cont. Pet. (C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. applications are accordingly dismissed. We make no comments on merits. All pleas and contentions are left open. I.A. Nos. 196054/2024, 196057/2024 and 196058/2024 I.A. No. 196054/2024 for intervention/impleadment is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Notwithstanding the pendency of the present proceedings and the order dated 07.02.2018, the applicant(s) are given liberty to proceed before any other forum with regard to the claims in accordance with law. Accordingly, I.A. Nos. 196057/2024 and 196058/2024 are disposed of. We make no comments on the merits. All pleas and contentions are left open. I.A. Nos. 194826/2024 and 194596/2024 I.A. No. 194596/2024 for intervention/impleadment is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Notwithstanding the pendency of the present proceedings and order dated 07.02.2018, the applicant(s) are permitted to take recourse to appropriate remedies as available to them in law. I.A. No. 194826/2024 is disposed of accordingly. We make no comments on the merits. All pleas and contentions are left open. 19
Cont. Pet. (C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. I.A. No. 202034/2024 Prayer for intervention/impleadment is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Notwithstanding the pendency of the present proceedings, the applicant(s) are permitted to proceed with the civil suit. I.A. No. 202034/2024 is disposed of accordingly. We make no comments on the merits. All pleas and contentions are left open. I.A. No. 131/2015 None appears for the applicant(s). Even yesterday, none had appeared for the applicant(s). Accordingly, the application is dismissed in default. I.A. No. 123051/2021 The application is disposed of permitting the applicant(s) to raise all pleas and contentions before the appropriate forum/court. We clarify that we have not made any comments on the pleas and contentions raised by either side, that is, the applicant(s) or M/s Sahara Prime City Limited. I.A. No. 183801/2023 Notwithstanding the pendency of the present proceedings and the order dated 07.02.2018, the applicant(s) are permitted to take recourse to appropriate remedies as available to them in law. This application is accordingly disposed of. We make no comments on the merits. 20
Cont. Pet. (C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. All pleas and contentions are left open. Writ Petition (C) No. 877/2018 Re-list tomorrow, that is, on 05.09.2024. (DEEPAK GUGLANI) (BABITA PANDEY) (R.S. NARAYANAN) AR-CUM-PS COURT MASTER (SH) ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 21
Cont.Pet.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. ITEM NO.1 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CONMT.PET.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 413/2012 in C.A. No. 9833/2011 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUBRATA ROY SAHARA AND ORS. & ORS. Respondent(s) (IA No. 147567/2023 - APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION IA No. 160131/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 54042/2023 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 159484/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 27489/2023 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 55526/2018 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 78070/2023 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 50405/2018 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 50393/2018 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 172867/2022 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 161884/2022 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 159473/2022 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 27488/2023 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 65863/2018 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 78069/2023 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 160124/2022 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 54040/2023 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 50392/2018 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 16794/2020 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 182909/2022 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 183801/2023 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 161889/2022 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 55525/2018 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT) WITH CONMT.PET.(C) No. 260/2013 In C.A. No. 8643/2012 (XVII) (IA No. 136343/2018 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 102871/2019 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT) R.P.(Crl.) No. 458/2014 In W.P.(Crl.) No. 57/2014 (X) (IA No. 14799/2014 - APPLICATION FOR INSPECTION OF FILE) T.C.(C) No. 87/2014 (III-A) W.P.(C) No. 1424/2019 (X) 1
Cont.Pet.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. W.P.(C) No. 1123/2020 (X) (FOR ADMISSION) W.P.(C) No. 1427/2020 (X) (IA No. 7256/2022 - EARLY HEARING APPLICATION) W.P.(C) No. 1333/2020 (X) (FOR ADMISSION) Diary No. 26472/2020 (XVII) C.A. Nos. 7443-7444/2021 (XVII) (IA No. 159618/2021 - STAY APPLICATION) W.P.(C) No. 312/2022 (X) (FOR ADMISSION) W.P.(C) No. 284/2022 (X) (FOR ADMISSION) CONMT.PET.(C) No. 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9833/2011 (XVII) (IA No. 1/2013 - STAY APPLICATION) CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 (XVII) (IA No. 183/2016 - APP FOR PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS IA No. 68897/2024 - APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION IA No. 194846/2024 - APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION IA No. 169125/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 203490/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 191447/2023 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 188912/2024 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 118234/2020 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 44861/2021 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 99284/2021 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 109345/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 188847/2024 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 10494/2019 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 41948/2021 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 78626/2021 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 95547/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 203485/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 30932/2018 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 58117/2020 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 7215/2023 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 114427/2017 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 138094/2018 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 52680/2020 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 35238/2021 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 71965/2021 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 202750/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 203523/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS 2
Cont.Pet.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. IA No. 43715/2020 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 24886/2021 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 68141/2024 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 49580/2017 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 136394/2021 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 203516/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 88532/2023 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 48440/2024 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 47681/2017 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 88721/2017 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 123978/2017 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 166294/2019 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 44866/2021 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 176906/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 6292/2024 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 87599/2017 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 163394/2019 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 130199/2020 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 48235/2018 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 40383/2023 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 115237/2017 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 74012/2018 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 260/2017 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 87559/2017 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 69648/2018 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 160939/2018 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 142662/2023 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 18940/2018 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 131658/2023 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 11181/2018 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 63773/2018 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 137135/2018 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 1446/2022 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 58012/2018 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 134546/2018 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 91335/2019 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 193416/2022 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 56231/2018 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 123268/2017 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 78376/2018 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 97945/2019 - EARLY HEARING APPLICATION IA No. 44867/2021 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING AFFIDAVIT IA No. 44863/2021 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING AFFIDAVIT IA No. 87565/2017 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 115238/2017 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 142664/2023 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 99230/2019 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 25/2014 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 48237/2018 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 60598/2017 - EXTENSION OF TIME IA No. 110/2015 - EXTENSION OF TIME 3
Cont.Pet.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. IA No. 22/2014 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 231/2016 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 78372/2018 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 22814/2019 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 228/2016 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 136758/2019 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 227/2016 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 283/2017 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 99229/2019 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 144/2016 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 194/2016 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 278/2017 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 55138/2017 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 71960/2021 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 123984/2017 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 232/2016 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 99712/2021 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 163389/2019 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 203489/2022 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 142671/2023 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 87563/2017 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 48224/2018 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 116947/2020 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 37708/2023 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 115235/2017 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 41944/2021 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 71987/2021 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 203484/2022 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 145099/2024 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 69646/2018 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 95545/2022 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 114416/2017 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 202747/2022 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 203520/2022 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 110821/2017 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 43479/2020 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 16501/2021 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 90828/2019 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 7584/2021 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 203515/2022 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 88529/2023 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 32764/2019 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 56/2015 - MODIFICATION OF COURT ORDER IA No. 182815/2024 - MODIFICATION OF COURT ORDER IA No. 129469/2018 - MODIFICATION OF COURT ORDER IA No. 123051/2021 - MODIFICATION OF COURT ORDER IA No. 78121/2023 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES IA No. 119572/2023 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES IA No. 233/2016 - PERMISSION TO FILE ANNEXURES 4
Cont.Pet.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. IA No. 47133/2017 - PERMISSION TO PLACE ON RECORD SUBSEQUENT FACTS IA No. 28/2014 - RELEASE OF THE PETITIONER) T.C.(C) No. 83/2014 (XVII) T.C.(C) No. 86/2014 (XVII) T.C.(C) No. 84/2014 (XVII) T.C.(C) No. 85/2014 (XVII) C.A. Nos. 7152-7153/2016 (XVII-A) (IA No. 23883/2024 - APPLICATION FOR SETTLEMENT IA No. 122100/2020 - APPLICATION FOR SUBSTITUTION IA No. 122101/2020 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 172155/2023 - EARLY HEARING APPLICATION IA No. 72714/2022 - RELEASE OF THE FIXED DEPOSIT) C.A. Nos. 9224-9225/2016 (XVII-A) MA Nos.1364-1365/2017 in C.A. No. 9813/2011 (XVII) (IA No. 123568/2017 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS) W.P.(C) No. 877/2018 (X) (IA No. 96025/2020 - APPLICATION FOR TAGGING/DETAGGING) W.P.(C) No. 1459/2019 (X) W.P.(C) No. 147/2024 (X) (FOR ADMISSION and IA No.53947/2024-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.) CONMT.PET.(C) Nos. 55-57/2016 IN CONMT.PET.(C) no. 413/2012, CONMT.PET.(C) no. 260/2013 @ CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 (XVII) Date : 03-09-2024 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. SUNDRESH HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE BELA M. TRIVEDI Amicus Curie Mr. Shekhar Naphade, Sr. Adv. Ms. Fauzia Shakil, AOR Ms. Aishwarya Dash, Adv. Ms. Salonee Paranjpe, Adv. Ms. Farah Hashmi, Adv. Mr. Shivansh Saxena, Adv. Ms. Tasmiya Taleha, Adv. Mr. Karan, Adv. 5
Cont.Pet.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. For Petitioner(s)/ Applicant(s) Dr. Arvind S. Avhad, AOR Mr. Abhishek Krishna, Adv. Mr. Sushil Sonkar, Adv. Mr. Rajat Kapoor, Adv. Mr. R. Balasubramanian, Sr. Adv. Mr. Abhigya Kushwah, AOR Mr. Akhilesh Kumar Shrivastava, Adv. Mrs. Sunita Yadav, Adv. Mr. Akash Sharma, Adv. Mr. Rishav Ranjan, Adv. Mr. Pradeep Kumar Dubey, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Rajkumar Murarka, Adv. Mr. Rohan Rohatgi, Adv. Mrs. Shubhangini Rohatgi, Adv. Mr. Ravindra Kumar Gupta, Adv. Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Sr. Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Shreyash Kumar, Adv. M/s. K.J. John And Co, AOR Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR Mr. Rohan Thawani, Adv. Ms. Pooja Dhar, AOR Ms. S. Ambica, Adv. Mr. Aarohi Bhalla, Adv. Mr. Aadhar Nautiyal, Adv. Ms. Sujata Kurdukar, AOR Mr. Gautam Talukdar, AOR Mr. Bishwajit Bhattacharyya, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sahil Tagotra, AOR Mrs. Shally Bhasin, AOR Mr. G. Umapathy, Sr. Adv. Mr. Suvin Kumaran, Adv. Mr. Rohit Singh, AOR Mr. Manish Vashisht, Adv. Mr. Sameer Vashisht, Adv. Dr. (Mrs.) Vipin Kumar, Adv. 6
Cont.Pet.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. Mr. Amitabh Chaturvedi, Adv. Mr. Ankit Monga, Adv. Ms. Rakhi Roy, AOR Mr. S.S. Ray, Adv. Mr. Rakhi Roy, AOR Mr. Vaibhav Golia, Adv. Mr. Shubhaankar Ray, Adv. Mr. Ratnakar Dash, Sr. Adv. Mr. G. Sivabalamurgan, AOR Mr. Selvaraj Mahendran, Adv. Mr. C. Adhikesavan, Adv. Mr. P.V. Harikrishnan, Adv. Mr. C. Kavin Ananth, Adv. Mr. Robin Jaisinghani, Adv. Mr. Dhananjay Kataria, Adv. Ms. Mahima Shroff, Adv. Mr. Chirag M. Shroff, AOR Mr. Sandeep Bajaj, Adv./AOR Mr. Aditya Chopra, Adv. Mr. Mayank Biyani, Adv. Mr. Devraj Bhargava, Adv. Mr. Pavanshree Agarwal, AOR Mr. Rohit Anil Rathi, AOR Ms. Niharika Singh, Adv. Mr. Yashas R.K., Adv. Ms. Liz Mathew, Sr. Adv. Ms. Vidhi Goel, Adv. Mr. Krishna Dev Yadav, Adv. Mr. Pankaj Sethi, Adv. Mr. Ajit Kumar Sinha, Sr. Adv. Mr. Shekhar Prit Jha, Adv. Ms. Preeti Kumari, Adv. Mr. Siddhartha Dave, Sr. Adv. Mr. Shantanu Phanse, Adv. Mr. Sabir Kachhi, Adv. Mr. Prastut Mahesh Dalvi, AOR Mr. Anish Maheshwari, Adv. Mr. Samir Malik, AOR Mr. Pawan Shree Agrawal, Adv./AOR 7
Cont.Pet.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. For Respondent(s) Mr. Prashant Kumar, AOR Mrs. Shally Bhasin, AOR M/s. K.J. John And Co, AOR Mr. Siddhartha Dave, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, AOR Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Yajat Gulia, Adv. Ms. Arundhati Mukherjee, Adv. Mr. N. Venkatraman, A.S.G.(N/P) Mrs. V.C. Bharathi, Adv. Mr. Merusagar Samantaray, Adv. Mr. Saransh Kumar, Adv. Mr. Bharat Sood, Adv. Ms. Nachiketa Joshi, Adv. Mr. T.S. Sabarish, Adv. Mr. Amrish Kumar, AOR Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Mr. Siddhartha Dave, Sr. Adv. Mr. V. Giri, Sr. Adv. Mr. Arvind Nayar, Sr. Adv Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv. Mr. Devanshu Yadav, Adv. Mr. Yajat Gulia, Adv. Mr. Sameer Pandey, Adv. Mr. Sahil Sharma, Adv. Mr. Rishabh Parikh, Adv. Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Ms. Rao Vishwaja, Adv. Mr. Rahul Narang, Adv. Mr. Harshed Sundar, Adv. Mr. Nihar Dharmadhikari, Adv. Mr. Rohan Thawani, Adv. Ms. Pooja Dhar, AOR Ms. S. Ambica, Adv. Mr. Aniruddha Deshmukh, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv. Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR Mr. Bharat Bagla, Adv. 8
Cont.Pet.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. Mr. Sourav Singh, Adv. Mr. Aditya Krishna, Adv. Ms. Preet S. Phanse, Adv. Mr. Adarsh Dubey, Adv. Mr. Suryakant Singla, Adv. Ms. Supriya Juneja, AOR Mr. Amol Nirmalkumar Suryawanshi, AOR Mrs. Shilpa A. Suryawanshi, Adv. Ms. Srishty Pandey, Adv. Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AOR Mr. Gaurav Agrawal, AOR Mr. Sahil Tagotra, AOR Mr. Preshit Vilas Surshe, AOR Mr. Satyajit A. Desai, Adv. Mr. Abhinav K. Mutyalwar, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Gautam, Adv. Mr. Sachin Singh, Adv. Ms. Anagha S. Desai, AOR Ms. Jasmine Damkewala, AOR Ms. Vaishali Sharma, Adv. Mr. Divyam Khera, Adv. Mr. Advait Joshi, Adv. Mr. Vinay Kumar Mudgal, Adv. Mr. Vibhuti Sushant Gupta, Adv. Mr. Devgan Mudgal, Adv. Mr. Narender Kumar Verma, AOR Mr. Paras Kuhad, Sr. Adv. Mr. Manu Agarawal, Adv. Mr. Pratap Nimbalkar, Adv. Mr. Jitin Chaturvedi, Adv. Mr. Shuaib Hussain, Adv. Mrs. Pragya Baghel, AOR Mr. Salim Inamdar, Adv. Mr. Modassir H. Khan, Adv. Mr. S.N. Bhat, Sr. Adv. Mr. D.P. Chaturvedi, Adv. Mr. Tarun Kumar Thakur, Adv. Ms. Parvati Bhat, Adv. Mr. Vivek Ram R, Adv. 9
Cont.Pet.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. Mr. Abhay Choudhary M., Adv. Ms. Anuradha Mutatkar, AOR Mr. Divakar Kumar, AOR Mr. Manoj K. Mishra, AOR Mr. Umesh Dubey, Adv. Ms. Madhulika, Adv. Ms. Vuzmal, Adv. Mr. Amulya Dev, Adv. Mr. C. George Thomas, AOR Dr. Yusuf Iqbal Yusuf, Adv. Mr. Bhavya Sethi, Adv. Ms. Gyanika Kochar, Adv. Mr. Mohd. Abid Sheikh, Adv. Ms. Neelam Singh, AOR Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR Ms. Prerna Priyadarshini, Adv. Mr. Syed Faraz Alam, Adv. Mr. Atharva Gaur, Adv. Mr. Aayushman Aggarwal, Adv. Mr. Ravindra Keshavrao Adsure, AOR Mr. A.P.S. Ahluwaliya, Sr. Adv. Mr. S.S. Ahluwaliya, Adv. Mr. Mohit Kumar Sharma, Adv. Ms. Madhu Kumari, Adv. Mr. Abinash Kumar Mishra, AOR Mr. Pranaya Goyal, AOR Mr. Chiranjivi Sharma, Adv. Ms. Nehal Gupta, Adv. Mr. Vasu Gupta, Adv. Mr. Himanshu Shekhar, AOR Mr. M.L. Lahoty, Adv. Mr. Paban K Sharma, Adv. Mr. Anchit Sripat, Adv. Mr. Pranab Kumar Nayak, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar, Adv. Ms. Rukhmini Bobde, Adv. Ms. Soumya Priyadarshinee, Adv. Mr. Amit Kumar Srivastava, Adv. Mr. Amlaan Kumar, Adv. Mr. Vinayak Aren, Adv. 10
Cont.Pet.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. Mr. Vishal Prasad, AOR Mr. Kunal Cheema, AOR Mr. Shubham Chandankhede, Adv. Mr. N. Venkatraman, A.S.G. (N/P) Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR Mr. V.C. Bharathi, Adv. Ms. Rekha Pandey, Adv. Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv. Mr. P.V. Yogeswaran, Adv. Mrs. Chitrangda Rastaravara, Adv. Mr. Raman Yadav, Adv. Mr. Tushar Mehta, SG (N/P) Mr. N. Venkatraman, A.S.G.(N/P) Mr. Rana Mukerjee, Sr. Adv. Mr. Raj Bahadur Yadav, Adv. Mr. Venkatraman Chandrashekhara Bharathi, Adv. Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv. Mr. P.V. Yogeshwaran, Adv. Mr. Kanu Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Raj Bahadur Yadav, AOR Mr. Kaushal Yadav, AOR Mr. Nandlal Kumar Mishra, Adv. Dr. Ajay Kumar, Adv. Mr. Ritul Tandon, Adv. Mr. Ranjit Kumar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Prasenjit Keswani, Sr. Adv. Mr. Debmalya Chandra Banerjee, Adv. Ms. Tahira Karanjawala, Adv. Mr. Kartik Bhatnagar, Adv. Mr. Arjun Sharma, Adv. Ms. Apurva Rajora, Adv. Mr. Agastya Shelat, Adv. Ms. Sukanya Das, Adv. M/s. Karanjawala & Co., AOR UPON hearing the counsel, the Court made the following O R D E R I.A. No. 111758/2023 This application filed by the applicant, Deepa Ingole, is allowed. The execution proceedings pending before the State Consumer 11
Cont.Pet.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. Disputes Redressal Commission, Nagpur, Maharashtra can proceed in accordance with law. We clarify that we have not commented on the merits. All pleas and contentions are left open. I.A. Nos. 182909/2022 and 172867/2022 I.A. No. 182909/2022 for impleadment is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Notwithstanding the pendency of the present proceedings, I.A. No. 172867/2022 is disposed of by observing that the proceedings pursuant to the Arbitral Award dated 04.10.2016 will proceed in accordance with law. We clarify that we have not made any comments on the merits. All pleas and contentions are left open. I.A. No. 35238/2021 This application filed by the applicant(s), Sadhana and others, is allowed. The execution proceedings pending before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission can proceed in accordance with law. We clarify that we have not commented on the merits. All pleas and contentions are left open. I.A. Nos. 43479/2020 and 43715/2020 I.A. No. 43479/2020 for impleadment is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. 12
Cont.Pet.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. I.A. No. 43715/2020 filed by the applicant, Anita Kishore Sahu, is allowed. The execution proceedings pending before the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission can proceed in accordance with law. We clarify that we have not commented on the merits. All pleas and contentions are left open. I.A. Nos. 163394/2019 and 163389/2019 I.A. No. 163389/2019 for impleadment is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. I.A. No. 163394/2019 filed by the applicant(s), Hemant Sharad Kathikar and another, is allowed. The execution proceedings pending before the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission can proceed in accordance with law. We clarify that we have not commented on the merits. All pleas and contentions are left open. I.A. Nos. 32764/2019, 97945/2019 and 30932/2018 I.A. Nos. 97945/2019 and 32764/2019 for impleadment/early hearing are allowed, subject to all just exceptions. I.A. No. 30932/2018 is also allowed. The execution proceedings pending before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission can proceed in accordance with law. We clarify that we have not commented on the merits. All pleas and contentions are left open. 13
Cont.Pet.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. I.A. No. 136758/2019 Application for intervention/impleadment is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The execution proceedings pending before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum can proceed in accordance with law. We clarify that we have not commented on the merits. All pleas and contentions are left open. I.A. Nos. 160939/2018 and 58012/2018 I.A. No. 160939/2018 filed by the applicant(s), Sadhana Mehra and others, is allowed. I.A. No. 58012/2018 is also allowed. The execution proceedings pending before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission can proceed in accordance with law. We clarify that we have not commented on the merits. All pleas and contentions are left open. I.A. No. 114427/2017 This application filed by the applicant(s), Smt. Vasanti and others, is allowed. The execution proceedings pending before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission can proceed in accordance with law. We clarify that we have not commented on the merits. All pleas and contentions are left open. 14
Cont.Pet.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. I.A. 114416/2017 This application for impleadment is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. I.A. Nos. 115235/2017 and 115237/2017 I.A. Nos. 115235/2017 for impleadment is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. I.A. Nos. 115237/2017 is also allowed and it is clarified that the execution proceedings pending before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum can proceed in accordance with law. We also clarify that we have not commented on the merits. All pleas and contentions are left open. I.A. Nos. 263/2017 and 264/2017 I.A. No. 263/2017 for impleadment is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. I.A. No. 264/2017 is also allowed. The applicant is permitted to proceed with the execution proceedings in accordance with the law. We clarify that we have not made any comments on merits. All pleas and contentions are left open. I.A. No. 256/2017 Prayer for impleadment is allowed, subject to all just 15
Cont.Pet.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. exceptions. It is clarified that the execution proceedings pending before the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission can proceed in accordance with law. I.A. No. 256/2017 is accordingly disposed of. We also clarify that we have not commented on the merits. All pleas and contentions are left open. I.A. Nos. 87559/2017, 87563/2017 and 131658/2023 I.A. No. 87563/2017 for impleadment is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. It is clarified that the execution proceedings pending before the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission can proceed in accordance with law. I.A. Nos. 87559/2017 and 131658/2023 are accordingly dismissed. We also clarify that we have not commented on the merits. All pleas and contentions are left open. I.A. No. 55138/2017 This application for impleadment/intervention is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. I.A. No.240/2016 Prayer for impleadment is allowed, subject to all just 16
Cont.Pet.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. exceptions. It is clarified that the execution proceedings pending before the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission can proceed in accordance with law. I.A. No. 240/2016 is accordingly disposed of. We also clarify that we have not commented on the merits. All pleas and contentions are left open. I.A. No. 241/2016 Prayer for impleadment is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. It is clarified that the execution proceedings pending before the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission can proceed in accordance with law. I.A. No. 241/2016 is accordingly disposed of. We also clarify that we have not commented on the merits. All pleas and contentions are left open. I.A. No. 242/2016 Prayer for impleadment is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. It is clarified that the execution proceedings pending before the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission can proceed in accordance with law. I.A. No. 242/2016 is accordingly disposed of. 17
Cont.Pet.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. We also clarify that we have not commented on the merits. All pleas and contentions are left open. I.A. No. 243/2016 Prayer for impleadment is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. It is clarified that the execution proceedings pending before the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission can proceed in accordance with law. I.A. No. 243/2016 is accordingly disposed of. We also clarify that we have not commented on the merits. All pleas and contentions are left open. I.A. No.167/2016 Prayer for impleadment is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. It is clarified that the execution proceedings pending before the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission can proceed in accordance with law. I.A. No. 167/2016 is accordingly disposed of. We also clarify that we have not commented on the merits. All pleas and contentions are left open. I.A. No.166/2016 Prayer for impleadment is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. 18
Cont.Pet.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. It is clarified that the execution proceedings pending before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission can proceed in accordance with law. I.A. No. 166/2016 is accordingly disposed of. We also clarify that we have not commented on the merits. All pleas and contentions are left open. I.A. No. 227/2016 Prayer for intervention/impleadment is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Notwithstanding the pendency of the present proceedings, the applicant(s), Rahul Doshi, is permitted to proceed in accordance with the law. We clarify that we have not commented on the rights/interests and obligations of the applicant(s), Rahul Doshi, or Sahara Prime City Ltd., and the opposite party before the consumer court/forum. The consumer complaint filed before the consumer court/forum is restored to its original number and shall proceed in accordance with law. I.A. No. 227/2016 is accordingly disposed of. All pleas and contentions are left open. I.A. Nos. 69646/2018 and 69648/2 018 I.A. No. 69646/2018 for impleadement is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. In view of the fact that the 7.44 acres of land was already 19
Cont.Pet.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. acquired by the National Highways Authority of India, and title cannot be conferred on the applicant(s), we direct the Securities and Exchange Board of India 1 to refund the amount of 1,62,15,614/-₹ (Rupees one crore sixty two lakh fifteen thousands six hundred fourteen only) within a period of eight weeks from the date a copy of this order is received by them. No interest will be paid. It will be open to the SEBI to get in touch with the authorities to ascertain as to whether any compensation amount is lying deposited. If any amount is lying deposited, steps will be taken to deposit the same in the SEBI Sahara Refund Account. I.A. No. 69648/2018 is disposed of accordingly. I.A. Nos. 41944/2021 and 41948/2021 I.A. No. 41944/2021 for impleadment is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. It is open to the applicant(s) to approach the revenue authority for the issue of Patta. In case the applicant(s) is still aggrieved, it will be open to the applicant(s) to take recourse to appropriate remedies in accordance with law. The Sale Deed has already been executed in favour of the applicant(s). I.A. No. 41948/2021 is accordingly disposed of. I.A. No. 65863/2018 Prayer for intervention/impleadment is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. 1 For short “SEBI” 20
Cont.Pet.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. The applicant, Punjab National Bank, can proceed under the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 and The Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. The learned counsel appearing for the non-applicant(s) states that One Time Settlement has already been approved. We make no comments in this regard. We clarify that we have not commented on the merits of the case. All pleas and contentions are left open. I.A. No. 65863/2018 is accordingly disposed of. I.A. Nos. 55525/2018 and 55526/2018 I.A. No. 55525/2018 for impleadment is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Notwithstanding the order dated 07.02.2018, the applicant(s) can proceed in accordance with law. All pleas and contentions are left open. I.A. No. 55526/2018 is disposed of accordingly. I.A. No. 50405/2018 The oral prayer for change of cause title made by the learned counsel appearing for the applicant(s), Parinee Developers Ltd., stating that in view of the change in the name of the applicant(s), Parinee Developers Ltd. to Ramaranjan Developers Private Limited, 21
Cont.Pet.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. is accepted and allowed. The amended memo of parties will be filed within four weeks. Notwithstanding the pendency of the present proceedings and the order dated 07.02.2018, the proceedings pending before the Bombay High Court in Company Petition No. 1086/2015 are permitted to proceed in accordance with law. All pleas and contentions are left open. The application is disposed of accordingly. I.A. No. 50392/2018 This application for impleadment is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. I.A. No. 50393/2018 The oral prayer for change in cause title made by the learned counsel appearing for the applicant(s), Parinee Developers Ltd., stating that in view of the change in the name of the applicant(s), Parinee Developers Ltd. to Ramaranjan Developers Private Limited, is accepted and allowed. The amended memo of parties will be filed within four weeks. It is clarified that notwithstanding the pendency of the present proceedings and the order dated 07.02.2018, the proceedings pending before the Bombay High Court in Company Petition No. 1086/2015 are permitted to proceed in accordance with law. All pleas and contentions are left open. The application is disposed of accordingly. 22
Cont.Pet.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. I.A. No. 48235/2018 No order is required in the present application. The application is dismissed. I.A. Nos 11181/2018, 169444/2022, 193416/2022, 87599/2017 and 232/2016 These applications are misconceived and are dismissed. I.A. Nos. 37708/2023, 40383/2023, 7219/2023, 7215/2023 and 78121/2023 We are not inclined to entertain the present applications and leave it open to the applicant(s), Sameera Estates Pvt. Ltd., to take appropriate proceedings for redressal of their grievance, as permissible by law. We clarify that we have not commented on the merits. All pleas and contentions are left open. Recording the aforesaid, the applications are disposed of. I.A. Nos. 283/2017 and 33975/2017 I.A. No. 283/2017 for intervention/impleadment is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. I.A. No. 33975/2017 is disposed of, giving liberty to the applicant(s), ISS Facility Services India Pvt. Ltd. & Modern Protection & Investigations Pvt. Ltd. to initiate proceedings in accordance with law. We clarify that we have not commented on the merits. 23
Cont.Pet.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. All pleas and contentions are left open. I.A. Nos. 260-262/2017 These applications have been filed by the Reserve Bank of India 2 (RBI) with regard to the affairs of Sahara India Financial Corporation Limited 3 . It is stated that the RBI has filed a petition for winding up against SIFCL. No orders are required to be passed in the present applications as it is stated that investments have been sold and an amount of 94.85 crores has been deposited in the SEBI Sahara₹ Refund Account. It is, however, disputed on behalf of the erstwhile director. Re-list after four weeks. I.A. No. 251/2017 None is present on behalf of the Union of India/Directorate of Enforcement to press this application. In the interest of justice, no adverse order is passed today. Re-list on 05.09.2024. I.A. Nos. 253-255/2017 These applications are dismissed as infructuous with liberty to the applicant(s) to raise all pleas and conditions in Writ Petition (C) No. 877/2018. 2 For short “RBI” 3 For short “SIFCL ” 24
Cont.Pet.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. I.A. Nos. 278-279/2017 No orders are required to be passed in the present applications, except observing that the applicant(s) is entitled to raise all pleas and contentions, if aggrieved, before the appropriate forum/court. We also clarify that the property to be put up for sale is the unsold inventory and not the property where the title has already been transferred to a third party in accordance with law. The applications are disposed of accordingly. I.A. Nos. 123978/2017 and 123984/2017 These applications have become infructuous and, accordingly, disposed of. I.A. No. 231/2016 None is present for the applicant(s). It is also stated that the application has become infructuous as the property has been sold. The application is dismissed in default. I.A. Nos. 216-217/2016 In view of the order passed in the connected applications, the present applications have become infructuous and are accordingly dismissed. 25
Cont.Pet.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. I.A. Nos. 208/2016 and 22814/2019 Prayers for impleadment are allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Notwithstanding the order passed today, the applicant(s) are permitted to take recourse to appropriate remedies for the redressal of their grievances. All pleas and contentions are left open. The applications are accordingly disposed of. I.A. No. 194/2016 and 195/2016 The present applications have become infructuous. The applications are dismissed accordingly. I.A. Nos. 190-191/2016 and 273-274/2017 Prayer for intervention/impleadment is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The learned Senior Advocate appearing for Sahara India Prime City Limited submits that the said company does not intend to sell any land in the society/township known as Sahara City Homes at Coimbatore. In view of the statement made, the applications are disposed of. We clarify that in case the applicant(s) has any grievance on account of non-compliance and breach of the aforesaid statement, they will be entitled to approach the appropriate forum/court. 26
Cont.Pet.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. I.A. Nos. 177-179/2016, 168/2016 and 116-118/2015 We are not inclined to proceed with the present applications and leave it open to the applicant(s) to invoke the jurisdiction of the appropriate court/forum for adjudication of their grievances. Any such application/petition, if filed, will be considered and decided in accordance with law. In case any direction has been issued for a refund of the money deposited by the applicant(s), the said order will be brought to the notice of this Court by filing an application for passing an appropriate order. Recording the aforesaid, the applications are disposed of. All rights and contentions of the parties are left open. I.A. No. 158/2016 It is stated that the present application has become infructuous. The application is dismissed accordingly. I.A. Nos. 144-146/2016 We are not inclined to pass any orders in the present applications and leave it open to the applicant, Aamby Valley Esteemed Citizens Association, to take steps before the appropriate court/forum. However, we clarify that the orders passed in the present 27
Cont.Pet.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. proceedings including the order dated 07.02.2018 will not be read as prohibiting any forum/court from passing any appropriate order. All pleas and contentions are left open. The applications are disposed of accordingly. I.A. Nos. 192-193/2016 It is stated that these applications have become infructuous. The applications are dismissed as infructuous. I.A. No. 211/2016 Prayer for impleadement is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. I.A. No.211/2016 is disposed of in terms of the order passed above in I.A. No. 69648/2018. I.A. No. 239/2016 Learned counsel for the applicant(s) seeks permission to withdraw the present application. In view of the statement made, the application is dismissed as withdrawn. I.A. No. 131/2015 Re-list tomorrow, that is, on 04.09.2024. (DEEPAK GUGLANI) (BABITA PANDEY) (R.S. NARAYANAN) AR-CUM-PS COURT MASTER (SH) ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 28
ITEM NO.801 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CONMT.PET.(C) No. 1820-1822/2017 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9833/2011 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUBRATA ROY SAHARA AND ORS. & ORS. Respondent(s) WITH SLP(C) NO.22355/2017 ETC. Date : 22-04-2024 These matters were orally mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA For Petitioner(s) Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Sr. Adv. Mr. Amarjit Singh B. Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Shreyash Kumar, Adv. M/S. K J John And Co, AOR Ms. Fauzia Shakil, AOR (Mentioned by) For Respondent(s) Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR Mr. Kunal Cheema, AOR Mr. Ravindra Keshavrao Adsure, AOR Mr. Pranaya Goyal, AOR UPON Mentioning, the Court made the following O R D E R Upon mentioning, the matters are taken on Board. Subject to orders of the Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India , list these matters on 3 rd , 4 th and 5 th September, 2024. (BABITA PANDEY) (R.S. NARAYANAN) COURT MASTER (SH) ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
ITEM NO.9 COURT NO.2 SECTION X S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s). 147/2024 NAGENDRA KUMAR KUSHWAHA & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Respondent(s) (FOR ADMISSION and IA No.53947/2024-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. ) Date : 07-03-2024 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA For Petitioner(s) Mr. R. Balasubramanium, Sr. Adv. Mr. Abhigya Kushwah, AOR Mr. Akhilesh Kumar Shrivastava, Adv. Mrs. Sunita Yadav, Adv. Mr. Akash Sharma, Adv. Mr. Rishav Ranjan, Adv. Mr. Pradeep Kumar Dubey, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Rajkumar Murarka, Adv. Mr. Rohan Rohatgi, Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel, the Court made the following O R D E R List the present petition along with IA No. 131658 of 2023 in Contempt Petition (Civil) No. 412 of 2012 ( Securities and Exchange Board of India v. Sahara India Real Estate Corp. Ltd. (SIRCL) & Ors. ) and other connected matters before the appropriate Bench. (BABITA PANDEY) (R.S. NARAYANAN) COURT MASTER (SH) ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
ITEM NO.27 COURT NO.15 SECTION X S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS WRIT PETITION(S)(CIVIL) NO(S). 1424/2019 ANIRUDDHA Petitioner(s) VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Respondent(s) WITH W.P.(C) No. 1459/2019 (X) W.P.(C) No. 1427/2020 (X) (FOR ADMISSION IA No. 7256/2022 - EARLY HEARING APPLICATION) W.P.(C) No. 1333/2020 (X) (FOR ADMISSION) W.P.(C) No. 312/2022 (X) (FOR ADMISSION) W.P.(C) No. 284/2022 (X) (FOR ADMISSION) W.P.(C) No. 1123/2020 (X) (FOR ADMISSION) Date : 12-09-2023 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V. NAGARATHNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind S. Avhad, AOR Mr. Rajat Kapoor, Adv. Mr. Varun Varma, Adv. Mr. Abhishek Krishna, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Sachin Patil, AOR Mr. Aniruddha Deshmukh, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv. Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR Mr. Bharat Bagla, Adv. Mr. Sourav Singh, Adv. Mr. Aditya Krishna, Adv. 1
Mr. Siddharth Dave, Sr. Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, AOR Mr. Vikramjit Banerjee, ASG Mr. Merusagar Samantray, Adv. Mr. Saransh Kumar, Adv. Mr. Bharat Sood, Adv. Mr. Nachiketa Joshi, Adv. Mr. Prashant Rawat, Adv. Mr. Sudhakar Kulwant, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R On hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner(s) and learned senior counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 3 to 5, we find that these matters would have to be considered along with the Contempt Petition No.412/2012 in C.A. No. 9813/2011 with connected matter(s). Hence, the Registry is directed to list these matters along with the aforesaid cases after seeking orders of Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India. (RADHA SHARMA) (MALEKAR NAGARAJ) COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH) 2
ITEM NO.38 COURT NO.15 SECTION X S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s). 1424/2019 ANIRUDDHA Petitioner(s) VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Respondent(s) WITH W.P.(C) No. 1459/2019 (X) W.P.(C) No. 1427/2020 (X) (FOR ADMISSION IA No. 7256/2022 - EARLY HEARING APPLICATION) W.P.(C) No. 1333/2020 (X) (FOR ADMISSION) W.P.(C) No. 312/2022 (X) (FOR ADMISSION) W.P.(C) No. 284/2022 (X) (FOR ADMISSION) W.P.(C) No. 1123/2020 (X) (FOR ADMISSION) Date : 07-07-2023 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V. NAGARATHNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind S. Avhad, AOR Mr. Rajat Kapoor, Adv. Mr. Varun Varma, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Vikramjit Banerjee, ASG Mr. Merusagar Samantaray, Adv. Mr. Saransh Kumar, Adv. Mr. Bharat Sood, Adv. Mr. Nachiketa Joshi, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, Adv. Mr. Sachin Patil, AOR Mr. Aniruddha Deshmukh, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv. Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR contd..
- 2 - Mr. Bharat Bagla, Adv. Mr. Sourav Singh, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dave, Sr. Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Adjourned. (NEETU SACHDEVA) (MALEKAR NAGARAJ) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH)
1 ITEM NO.38 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION X S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR SH. VIVEK SAXENA Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s). 1424/2019 ANIRUDDHA Petitioner(s) VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Respondent(s) WITH W.P.(C) No. 1459/2019 (X) W.P.(C) No. 1427/2020 (X) (FOR ADMISSION IA No. 7256/2022 - EARLY HEARING APPLICATION) W.P.(C) No. 1333/2020 (X) (FOR ADMISSION) W.P.(C) No. 312/2022 (X) (FOR ADMISSION) W.P.(C) No. 284/2022 (X) (FOR ADMISSION) Date : 08-05-2023 These petitions were called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind S. Avhad, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Yuvaraj Baburao Gaikwad,Adv. Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR Mr. Gautam Talukdar, AOR UPON hearing the counsel through Video Conference, the Court made the following O R D E R WP (C) Nos. 1424,1459/2019, 312/22 and 284/22 Respondent Nos. 3 to 5 have already filed the counter affidavit.
2 Despite due ser vice on respondent No. 1, there is no appearance. Four weeks time, as last chance is granted to respondent No. 2 , to file counter affidavit. After expiry of the said period, the matter be processed for listing before the Hon’ble Court, as per rules. W.P (C) Nos. 1427 and 1333/2020 Fresh matters VIVEK SAXENA Registrar MG
ITEM NO.47 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION X S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR SH. PAVANESH D. Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s). 1424/2019 ANIRUDDHA Petitioner(s) VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Respondent(s) WITH W.P.(C) No. 1459/2019 (X) W.P.(C) No. 1123/2020 (X) (FOR ADMISSION) W.P.(C) No. 1427/2020 (X) (FOR ADMISSION IA No. 7256/2022 - EARLY HEARING APPLICATION) W.P.(C) No. 1333/2020 (X) (FOR ADMISSION) W.P.(C) No. 312/2022 (X) (FOR ADMISSION) W.P.(C) No. 284/2022 (X) (FOR ADMISSION) Date : 21-03-2023 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind S. Avhad, AOR Mr. Sachin Pahwa, Adv. Mr. Arvind S. Avhad, Adv. Ms. Swati Jain, Adv. Mr. Sunil Dutt, Adv. Ms. Reeta Puniya, Adv. Mr. Gurmeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Priyanshu Maheshwari, Adv. Ms. Shashi Kumar, Adv. Ms. Surbhi Lata, Adv. Mr. Manish Dhingra, Adv. Ms. Saket Gautam, Adv. Ms. Shivangi Singh, Adv. Ms. Surajita Pattanaik, Adv. Mr. Dr. Pratyush Nandan, Adv. Ms. Shweta Mulchandani, Adv.
Mr. Naeem Ilyas, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Sachin Patil, AOR Mr. Yuvraj Gaikwad, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv. Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR Mr. Bharat Bagla, Adv. Mr. Sourav Singh, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, AOR UPON hearing the counsel through Video Conference, the Court made the following O R D E R W.P.(C) Nos. 1424/2019 and 1459/2019 Respondent nos.3, 4 and 5 have already filed counter affidavit. Four weeks time, is granted to respondent no.2, to file counter affidavit. Two weeks time, is granted to the petitioner, to serve copy of the petition papers on the Ld. Standing Counsel appearing for respondent no.1 - Union of India and file necessary proof thereof. List again on 08.05.2023. W.P.(C) Nos. 284/2022 and 312/2022 Respondent nos.3 to 5 have already filed counter affidavit. Two weeks time, is granted to the petitioner, to take fresh steps to issue notice to respondent nos.1 and 2, who are unserved. As requested, dasti service in addition, is permitted. List again on 08.05.2023. W.P.(C) No. 1123/2020 Respondent nos.3 to 5 have already filed counter affidavit. Despite due service on respondent No.1, there is no appearance. Four weeks time, is granted to respondent No.2 to file counter affidavit.
After expiry of four weeks, the matter be processed for listing before the Hon’ble Court, as per rules. W.P.(C) No. 1123/2020 Since this is a fresh matter, same be processed for listing before the Hon’ble Court, as per rules. PAVANESH D. Registrar
ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.7 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CONMT.PET.(C) NO. 1820-1822/2017 IN CONMT.PET.(C) NO. 413/2012 IN C.A. NO. 9833/2011 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA PETITIONER(S) VERSUS SUBRATA ROY SAHARA AND ORS. & ORS. RESPONDENT(S) (Mr. Shekhar Naphade, Sr. Advocate (Amicus Curie)) IA No. 159484/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 161884/2022 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 50405/2018 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 50393/2018 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 172867/2022 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 159473/2022 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 161889/2022 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 182909/2022 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 50392/2018 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT) WITH SLP(C) No. 16009-16010/2022 (XIV) (IA No. 153315/2022 - MODIFICATION OF COURT ORDER) W.P.(C) No. 877/2018 (X) (FOR ADMISSION AND IA No. 96025/2020 - APPLICATION FOR TAGGING/DETAGGING) CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 (XVII) (Only FOR ON IA 104/2015 FOR ON IA 251/2017 FOR ON IA 253/2017 IA No. 136394/2021 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 78626/2021 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 30932/2018 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 71965/2021 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 35238/2021 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 166294/2019 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 169125/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 109345/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 160939/2018 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 137135/2018 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 58012/2018 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 71960/2021 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 71987/2021 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT 1
IA No. 32764/2019 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT) Date : 09-01-2023 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. SUNDRESH HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE BELA M. TRIVEDI For the parties: Mr. Bishwajit Bhattacharyya, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sahil Tagotra, AOR Mr. Abhishek Pandey, Adv. Ms. Abhivyakti Banerjee, Adv. Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Akhil Abraham Roy, Adv. Mr. Vijay Valson, Adv. Mr. Abhishek Anand, Adv. Ms. Unnimaya S. Adv. M/S. K J John And Co, AOR Mr. Shyam Divan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Govind Manoharamn, Adv. Ms. Anshula Laroiya, Adv. Mr. Neel Kamal Mishra, Adv. Mr. Jatin Zaveri, AOR Mr. Vinay Navare, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Manmohan Nimbalkar, Adv. Mr. Abishek Vikram, AOR Ms. Gayatri Virmani, Adv. Mr. Nirmal Goenka, Adv. Mr. Sumeer Sodhi, AOR Mr. Aman Nandrajog, Adv. Mr. Arjun Nanda, Adv. Mr. Rohit Saroj, Adv. Mr. Preshit Surshe, Adv. Mr. Akash Kakade, Adv. Mr. V. Giri, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Gautam T., Adv. Mr. Sameer Pandey, Adv. Mr Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Devanshu Yadav, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. 2
Mr. Neeraj Kishan Kaul, Sr. Adv. Mr. Shekhar Prit Jha, AOR Ms. Preeti, Adv. Ms. Sakshi, Adv. Ms. Harshita Arora, Adv. Mr. K.M. Nataraj, ASG (NP) Mr. Harish Pandey, Adv. Mr. Atulesh Kumar, Adv. Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Rahul G. Tamwani, Adv. Mr. G. S. Makker, AOR Mr. R Venkataramani, Attorney General for India (NP) Mr. Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General (NP) Mrs. Aishwarya Bhati, A.S.G.(NP) Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv. Mr. Piyush Beriwal, Adv. Mr. Anirudh Sharma II, Adv. Mr. Amrish Kumar, AOR Mr. Ramesh Babu, Adv. Ms. Manisha Singh, Adv. Ms. Jagriti Bharti, Adv. Mr. Raj Bahadur Yadav, AOR Mr. Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General (NP) Mrs. Aishwarya Bhati, ASG (NP) Mr. Rana Mukerjee, Sr. Adv. Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv. Mr. Kanu Agarawal, Adv. Mr. P V Yogeshwaran, Adv. Ms. Poornima Singh, Adv. Ms. Kunika Champawat, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR Mr. Kaushal Yadav, AOR Mr. Nandlal Kumar Mishra, Adv. Mr. Pramod Kumar, Adv. Ms. Akansha Rai, Adv. Ms. Apeksha Rai, Adv. Ms. Yashoda Katiyar, Adv. Mr. Sameer Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Amol Nirmalkumar Suryawanshi, AOR Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AOR Mr. Gaurav Agrawal, AOR Mr. Omkar Geedhe, Adv. Mr. Saurav Sunil, Adv. 3
Mr. Bishwajit Bhattacharyya, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sahil Tagotra, AOR Mr. Abhishek Pandey, Adv. Ms. Abhivyakti Banerjee, Adv. Mr. Preshit Vilas Surshe, AOR Ms. Jasmine Damkewala, AOR Ms. Vaishali Sharma, Adv. Ms. Lovely Garg, Adv. Ms. Vaishali Sharma, Adv. Mrs. Pragya Baghel, AOR Mr. Ravindra Keshavrao Adsure, AOR Mr. Sandeep Sudhakar Deshmukh, Adv. Mr. Ajay Gadegoankar, Adv. Mr. Yash Prashant Sonavane, Adv. Ms. Sakshi Ajit Kale, Adv. Mr. Rohan Darade, Adv. Mr. Luv Mishra, Adv. Mr. Pranaya Goyal, AOR Mr. Chiranjivi Sharma, Adv. Ms. Neetika Sharma, Adv. Mr. Kunal Cheema, AOR Ms. Aditi Deshpande Parkhi, Adv. Mr. Shivam Dube, Adv. Mr. Chirag M. Shroff, AOR Mr. Robin Jaisinghani, Adv. Mr. Shailendra Singh, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel, the Court made the following O R D E R To cut short delay and expedite hearing, we direct that, subject to all just exceptions and office objections, let notice be issued in all the pending applications, including unregistered applications. Notices will be issued by all modes, including dasti. Counter affidavit/reply will be filed within four weeks from 4
the date of service. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, will be filed within four weeks from the date of service of the counter affidavit/reply. Copy of the applications along with the counter affidavit/ reply and rejoinder affidavit, if any, will be served on the learned Amicus Curiae, Mr. Shekhar Naphade, Senior Advocate, the learned counsel for the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of Sahara Group. The learned Amicus Curiae, Mr. Shekhar Naphade, Senior Advocate, will appoint an Advocate-on-Record, who will act as a nodal advocate and logistic coordinator. The Advocate-on-Record, so appointed, will be paid, out of pocket and miscellaneous expenses as per the bills/invoices raised, and Rs.10,000/- per appearance in the Court. In addition, the learned Advocate-on-Record will be paid Rs.40,000/- (consolidated) as reading and preparation fee. Fee will be paid from the money/funds available with SEBI. Re-list for hearing and arguments on 18 th , 19 th and 20 th April 2023. SLP(C) NOS. 16009-16010/2022 The learned counsel for the parties jointly state that the present special leave petitions have been rendered infructuous in view of the subsequent orders and developments. In view of the statement made, the special leave petitions are dismissed as infructuous. This dismissal is without prejudice to the other matters pending before this Court. Further the parties may challenge other orders passed by the High Court if they so desire and choose to do so, in accordance 5
with law. The High Court is requested to dispose of the matters as expeditiously as possible. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. W.P.(C) No. 877/2018 Issue notice by all modes, including dasti. Counter affidavit/reply will be filed within four weeks. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, will be filed within four weeks from the service of counter affidavit/reply. Copy of the writ petition, the counter affidavit/reply and rejoinder affidavit, if any, will be served on the learned Amicus Curiae, Mr. Shekhar Naphade, Senior Advocate, who may submit a written note/submissions through the Advocate-on-Record. Re-list on 18 th , 19 th and 20 th April 2023. (POOJA SHARMA) COURT MASTER (SH) (R.S. NARAYANAN) COURT MASTER (NSH) 6
1 (REVISED FOR APPEARANCE) ITEM NO.56 COURT NO.8 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CONMT.PET.(C) No. 1820-1822/2017 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9833/2011 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUBRATA ROY SAHARA AND ORS. & ORS. Respondent(s) (IA No. 159484/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 159473/2022 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION) WITH SLP(C) No. 16009-16010/2022 (XIV) (IA No. 153315/2022 - MODIFICATION OF COURT ORDER) W.P.(C) No. 877/2018 (X) (FOR ADMISSION IA No. 96025/2020 - APPLICATION FOR TAGGING/DETAGGING) CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 (XVII) (Only FOR ON IA 251/2017 IA No. 166294/2019 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 30932/2018 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 137135/2018 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 32764/2019 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT) Date : 02-12-2022 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. SUNDRESH For Parties Mr. R. Venkatramani, AG Mr. Tushar Mehta, SG Mr. Piyush Beriwal Adv. Mr. Rajat Nair Adv. Mr. Anirudh Sanganeria Adv. Mr. Anirudh Sharma Adv. Mr. Amrish Kumar, AOR Mr. Pratap Venugopal, AOR Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv.
2 Mr. Akhil Abraham Roy, Adv. Mr. Vijay Valsan, Adv. Mr. Abhishek Anand, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Akhil Abraham Roy, Adv. M/S. K J John And Co, AOR Mr. Sumeer Sodhi, AOR Mr. Arjun Nanda, Adv. Mr. Rohit Saroj, Adv. Mr. Biswajit Bhattacharyya, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sahil Tagotra, AOR Ms. Abhivyakti Banerjee, Adv. Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR Mr. Ayush Choudhury, Adv. Mr. Devanshu Yadav, Adv. Mr. Sameer Pandey, Adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Mr. Sahil Tagotra, AOR Mr. Preshit Vilas Surshe, AOR Mr. Salim A. Inamdar, Adv. Ms. Pragya Baghel, AOR Mr. Ravindra Keshavrao Adsure, AOR Mr. Yash Prashant Sonavane, Adv. Mr. Rohan Darade, Adv. Ms. Sakshi Ajit Kale, Adv. Mr. Gopal Balwant Sathe, Adv. Mr. Raj Bahadur Yadav, AOR Dr. Maneka Guruswamy, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pranaya Goyal, AOR Mr. Madhav Ved, Adv. Mr. Utkarsh Pratap, Adv. Ms. Sachi Udeshi, Adv. Ms. Miloni Rathore, Adv. Mr. Rajwansh Chudhary, Adv. Mr. Kaushal Yadav, AOR Mr. Kunal Cheema, AOR
3 Mr. Shivam Dube, Adv. Mr. Sanjay Dubey, Adv. Mr. Roshan Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Kunal Cheema, AOR Mr. Amol Nirmalkumar Suryawanshi, AOR Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AOR Mr. Shyam Divan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Govind Manoharan, Adv. Ms. Anshula Laroiya, Adv. Mr. Jatin Zaveri, AOR Mr. Neel Kamal Mishra, Adv. Mr. D.S. Mishra, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Agrawal, AOR Mr. Omkar Geedh, Adv. Mr. George Thomas, Adv. Mr. Chirag M. Shroff,AOR Mr. Shailendra P. Singh, Adv. Ms. Jasmine Damkewala, AOR Ms. Vaishali Sharma, Adv. Ms. Lovely Garg, Adv. Mr. Dinesh Chander Trehan, Adv. Ms. Vaishali Sharma, Adv. Ms. Lovely Garg, Adv. Mr Dinesh Chander Trehan, Adv UPON hearing the counsel, the Court made the following O R D E R Our attention is drawn to paragraph 26.5 of the judgment and order dated 04.06.2014, which is reported as " SEBI v. Sahara India Real Estate Corporation Limited and Others” , (2014) 8 SCC 751. The paragraph reads :- “ xx xx xx
4 26.5 Keeping in view the importance of the issues that fall for determination in these proceedings and the ramifications that the directions issued by this Court may have as also the fact that one very important order which is sought to be enforced in these proceedings was passed by a three-Judge Bench, we refer these proceedings to a three-Judge Bench to be constituted by the Hon'ble Chief Justice of India. xx xx xx” Accordingly, the cases may be placed before the Hon'ble Chief Justice of India for the constitution of a Bench of three Judges. Mr. Bishwajeet Bhattacharya, learned senior advocate states that he wants to withdraw I.A. Nos. 253-255/2017. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, learned advocate appearing on behalf SEBI, however, opposes the said request. No orders have been passed today. Some of the learned counsel for the parties have stated that the applications filed by them have not been shown in the Cause List. Learned counsel for the parties will approach the Registry and give the details of the applications which have not been listed. The Registry would act appropriately in this regard. List before the appropriate Bench on 07.12.2022. (BABITA PANDEY) COURT MASTER (SH) (KAMLESH RAWAT) COURT MASTER (NSH)
1 ITEM NO.804 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CONMT.PET.(C) No. 1820-1822/2017 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9833/2011 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUBRATA ROY SAHARA AND ORS. & ORS. Respondent(s) ([ONLY I.A. NOS. 35238 of 2021, 160939 of 2018 and 58012 of 2018 in Contempt Petition (Civil) No 412 of 2012 were mentioned) I.A. NOS. 35238 of 2021, 160939 of 2018 and 58012 of 2018 in Contempt Petition (Civil) No 412 of 2012 Date : 30-11-2022 These applications were mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA For Petitioner(s) M/S. K J John And Co, AOR For Respondent(s) Ms. Jasmine Damkewala, AOR (mentioned by) Ms. Vaishali Sharma, Adv. Lovely Garg, Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR Mr. Ravindra Keshavrao Adsure, AOR Mr. Pranaya Goyal, AOR Mr. Kunal Cheema, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R I.A. NOS. 35238 of 2021, 160939 of 2018 and 58012 of 2018 in Contempt Petition (Civil) No 412 of 2012 1 Upon being mentioned, the applications are taken on board.
2 2 Liberty to mention the applications before the Bench presided over by Hon’ble Mr Justice Sanjiv Khanna. (SANJAY KUMAR-I) (SAROJ KUMARI GAUR) DEPUTY REGISTRAR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
1 ITEM NO.801 COURT NO.4 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORP. LTD.(SIRCL) AND ORS.Respondent(s) WITH SLP(C) No. 16009-16010/2022 (XIV) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.161222/2021-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No.162845/2021-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. and IA No.161221/2021-PERMISSION TO FILE PETITION (SLP/TP/WP/..) and IA No.162844/2021-APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION) I.A. No. 153315 of 2022 Date : 02-11-2022 This petition was called on Mentioning today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. ABDUL NAZEER HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN For Petitioner(s) M/S. K J John And Co, AOR Mr. Sumeer Sodhi, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR (Mentioned by) Mr. Sahil Tagotra, AOR Mr. Preshit Vilas Surshe, AOR Ms. Jasmine Damkewala, AOR Mrs. Pragya Baghel, AOR Mr. Kaushal Yadav, AOR Mr. Amol Nirmalkumar Suryawanshi, AOR
2 Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AOR Mr. Jatin Zaveri, AOR Mr. Gaurav Agrawal, AOR UPON Mentioning the Court made the following O R D E R I.A. No. 153315 of 2022 IN SLP(C) No. 16009-16010/2022 List next week. (NEELAM GULATI) (KAMLESH RAWAT) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH)
ITEM NO.811 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CONMT.PET.(C) No. 1820-1822/2017 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9833/2011 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUBRATA ROY SAHARA AND ORS. & ORS. Respondent(s) WITH W.P.(C) NO.877/2018 IS ONLY MENTIONED TODAY] Date : 01-11-2022 This petition was mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE BELA M. TRIVEDI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Bishwajit Bhattacharyya, Sr. Adv. (Mentioned by) Mr. Sahil Tagotra, AOR M/S. K J John And Co, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR Mr. Pranaya Goyal, AOR Mr. Kunal Cheema, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R W.P.(C) NO.877/2018 As prayed, list the matter on 14.11.2022 before the Bench presided over by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul. (NEETU KHAJURIA) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS (VIRENDER SINGH) COURT MASTER
ITEM NO.816 + 833 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IA Nos…………/2022 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 1820-1822/2017 in CONMT.PET. (C) No.412 & 413/2012 and 260 of 2013 in C.A. No.9813 and 9833 of 2011 and 8643 of 2012 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUBRATA ROY SAHARA & ORS. Respondent(s) (With appln.(s) for impleadment/intervention and for directions) With IA Nos.159484/2022 and 159473/2022 in CONMT.PET.(C) No.1820- 1822/2017 Date : 20-10-2022 These applications were mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE BELA M. TRIVEDI For Petitioner(s)/ Mr. Yogesh Kisan A., Adv. (mentioned by) Applicant(s) Mr. Kailas Bajirao Autade, AOR Ms. Menaka Guruswamy, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pranaya Goyal, AOR (mentioned by) For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R As prayed for, list these interlocutory applications along with IA Nos.32763/2019 and 30932/2018 in Contempt Petition (C) No.412/2012 in C.A. No.9813/2011 before the appropriate Court on 14.11.2022. (SANJAY KUMAR-II) (R.S. NARAYANAN) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH)
REVISED 1 * ITEM NO.830 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. Nos.32764/2019* & 137135/2018* In CONMT.PET.(C) No.412/2012 In C.A. No.9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORP. LTD.(SIRCL) & ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 17-10-2022 This matter was mentioned today.. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE BELA M. TRIVEDI Counsel for the Parties: Mentioned By Mr. P. Sureshan, AOR M/s. K J John And Co, AOR Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR Mr. Amol Nirmalkumar Suryawanshi, AOR Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AOR Mr. Jatin Zaveri, AOR Mr. Gaurav Agrawal, AOR Mr. Sahil Tagotra, AOR Mr. Preshit Vilas Surshe, AOR Ms. Jasmine Damkewala, AOR Ms. Pragya Baghel, AOR Mr. Kaushal Yadav, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List on 14.11.2022 before the appropriate Court. (MUKESH NASA) (VIRENDER SINGH) AR-cum-PS BRANCH OFFICER 1 Corrected I.A. Numbers in terms of Letter dated 20.10.2022 received from the Ld. Advocate
ITEM NO.830 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. Nos.32763/2019 & 30932/2018 In CONMT.PET.(C) No.412/2012 In C.A. No.9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORP. LTD.(SIRCL) & ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 17-10-2022 This matter was mentioned today.. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE BELA M. TRIVEDI Counsel for the Parties: Mentioned By Mr. P. Sureshan, AOR M/s. K J John And Co, AOR Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR Mr. Amol Nirmalkumar Suryawanshi, AOR Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AOR Mr. Jatin Zaveri, AOR Mr. Gaurav Agrawal, AOR Mr. Sahil Tagotra, AOR Mr. Preshit Vilas Surshe, AOR Ms. Jasmine Damkewala, AOR Ms. Pragya Baghel, AOR Mr. Kaushal Yadav, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List on 14.11.2022 before the appropriate Court. (MUKESH NASA) (VIRENDER SINGH) AR-cum-PS BRANCH OFFICER
ITEM NO.801 COURT NO.3 SECTION XVII (In the Chambers of Hon. Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J.) S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 & CONMT. PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 413/2012 along with applications S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORP. LTD.(SIRCL) AND ORS.Respondent(s) Date : 11-10-2022 These petitions were taken up today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABHAY S. OKA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM NATH For Petitioner(s) ---- For Respondent(s) UPON perusing the papers the Court made the following O R D E R List before a Bench of which one of us, (Hon. Abhay S. Oka, J.) is not a member. [CHARANJEET KAUR] [POONAM VAID] ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH)
ITEM NO.16 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MS. ANJU BAJAJ CHANDNA CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORP. LTD.(SIRCL) AND ORS.Respondent(s) (ONLY I.A.D NOS. 33170/2021 AND I.A. 11565/2022 IS TO BE LISTED BEFORE LD. REGISTRAR COURT. IA No. 33170/2021 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 11565/2022 - WITHDRAWAL OF CASE / APPLICATION) WITH SLP(C) No. 16009-16010/2022 (XIV) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.161222/2021-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No.162845/2021-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. and IA No.161221/2021-PERMISSION TO FILE PETITION (SLP/TP/WP/..) and IA No.162844/2021-APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION) C.A. No. 7443-7444/2021 (XVII) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.159619/2021-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No.159618/2021-STAY APPLICATION) Date : 27-09-2022 These matters were called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr Arjun Nanda, Adv. Mr. Sumeer Sodhi, AOR Mr Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Mr Akhil Abraham Roy, Adv. Mr Vijay Valsan, Adv. M/S. K J John And Co, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr Avadhesh Kumar Dubey, Adv. Mr Hari Singh, Adv. Mr Sandeep, Adv. Mr Sunil Prakash Pandey, Adv. Mr Chandan Mishra, Adv. Mr N.B.V.Srinivasa Reddy, Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR Mr Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Mr Devanshu Yadav, Adv. Mr Sameer Pandey, Adv. Contd....
-2- Mr. Amol Nirmalkumar Suryawanshi, AOR Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AOR Ms A Deepa, Adv. Mr Raj Bahadur Yadav, AOR Mr. B. V. Balaram Das, AOR Mr. Jatin Zaveri, AOR Mr. Gaurav Agrawal, AOR Mr. Sahil Tagotra, AOR Mr. Preshit Vilas Surshe, AOR Ms. Jasmine Damkewala, AOR Ms Vaishali Sharma, Adv. Mrs. Pragya Baghel, AOR Mr Nandlal Kumar Mishra, Adv. Mr Sandeep Mishra, Adv. Mr Pramod Kumar, Adv. Mr Arjun Raghuvanshi, Adv. Mr. Kaushal Yadav, AOR Mr Shafik Ahmed, Adv., Ms Yashoda Katiyar, Adv. Mr Ritul Tandon, Adv. Mr Deepak Kumar, Adv. Mrs Gargi Khanna, Adv. Mr A.K.Sharma, AOR UPON hearing the counsel, the Court made the following O R D E R CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 Ld. counsel appearing on behalf of 'Sahara India Real Estate Corp. Ltd(SIRCL)' has raised objection on the point that withdrawal is sought on the basis of the settlement and the said settlement be filed on record on behalf of the Intervenor, however, ld. counsel appearing on behalf of Intervenor submits that there is no settlement in writing, therefore, it is not possible to place the same on record. Be that as it may, the unregistered intervention application is permitted to be withdrawn. SLP(C) No. 16009-16010/2022 Service is complete on respondent nos. 1 and 2. Contd....
-3- Ld. Advocate-on-record, Mr Gautam Awasthi appears on behalf of respondent nos. 1 and 2 and seeks time for filing vakalatnama and counter affidavit. Four weeks' time is granted. Ld. counsel for the petitioner is granted two weeks' time to take fresh steps and/or file fresh particulars in respect of unserved respondent no.3. Ld. counsel for the petitioner has requested for service to be effected through the counsel appearing before the High Court. Allowed. List again on 15.11.2022. ANJU BAJAJ CHANDNA Registrar
ITEM NO.13 COURT NO.4 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Civil Appeal No(s). 7443-7444/2021 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Appellant(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA COMMERCIAL CORPORATION LTD. (SICCL) & ANR. ETC. Respondent(s) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.159619/2021-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No.159618/2021-STAY APPLICATION) Date : 09-09-2022 These appeals were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. ABDUL NAZEER HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. BOPANNA For Appellant(s) Mr. Arvind P.Datar,Sr.Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal,Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman,Adv. Mr. Akhil Abraham Roy,Adv. Mr. vijay Valsan,Adv. For M/S. K J John And Co, AOR For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Application for exemption from filing certified copy of the impugned judgment is allowed. Issue notice. Tag with Contempt Petition (Civil)No.412 of 2012 in Civil Appeal No.9813 of 2011. Operation of the impugned order shall remain stayed, until further orders. (ANITA MALHOTRA) (KAMLESH RAWAT) AR-CUM-PS COURT MASTER
ITEM NO.14 COURT NO.4 SECTION XIV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) Diary No(s). 29485/2021 (Arising out of impugned orders dated 15-01-2021 and dated 07-09-2021 in WP(C) No. 670/2021 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi) KAMLESH KUMARI AGRAWAL & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Respondent(s) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.161222/2021-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No.162845/2021-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. and IA No.161221/2021-PERMISSION TO FILE PETITION (SLP/TP/WP/..) and IA No.162844/2021-APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION) Date : 09-09-2022 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. ABDUL NAZEER HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. BOPANNA For Petitioner(s) Mr. Sumeer Sodhi, AOR Mr. Aman Nandrajog,Adv. Mr. Arjun Nanda,Adv. Mr. Rohit Saroj,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Applications for exemption from filing certified copy of the impugned judgment and exemption from filing official translation are allowed. Permission is granted to file Special Leave Petition(s). Issue notice. 1
Tag with Contempt Petition (Civil)No.412 of 2012 in Civil Appeal No.9813 of 2011. Operation of the impugned order(s) shall remain stayed. (ANITA MALHOTRA) (KAMLESH RAWAT) AR-CUM-PS COURT MASTER 2
ITEM NO.23 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR SH. AVANI PAL SINGH CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORP. LTD.(SIRCL) AND ORS.Respondent(s) (ONLY I.A.D NOS. 33170/2021 AND I.A. 11565/2022 IS TO BE LISTED BEFORE LD. REGISTRAR COURT. IA No. 33170/2021 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 11565/2022 - WITHDRAWAL OF CASE / APPLICATION) Date : 07-09-2022 These matters were called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Mr. Akhil Abraham Roy, Adv. M/S. K J John And Co, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Devanshu Yadav, Adv. Mr. Sameer Pandey, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AOR Ms. A. Deepa, Adv. Mr. Raj Bahadur Yadav, AOR Mr. Rajeev Ranjan, Adv. Mr. B. V. Balaram Das, AOR Mr. A.K. Sharma, AOR Mr. Jatin Zaveri, AOR Mr. Gaurav Agrawal, AOR Mr. Sahil Tagotra, AOR Mr. Preshit Vilas Surshe, AOR Ms. Jasmine Damkewala, AOR Ms. Vaishali Sharma, Adv. Mr. Dinesh Chander Trehan, Adv. Mr. Abhishek Thakral, Adv. Mr. Salim A. Inamdar, Adv. Mrs. Pragya Baghel, AOR Mr. Kaushal Yadav, AOR contd….
-2- Mr. Nandlal Kumar Mishra, Adv. Mr. Shafik Ahmed, Adv. Mr. Deepak Kumar, Adv. Md. Zeeshan Anjum, Adv. Mr. Rajni Kant, Adv. Mr. Amol Nirmalkumar Suryawanshi, AOR UPON hearing the counsel, the Court made the following O R D E R Upon hearing the Ld. counsel appearing for S ahara India Real Estate Corp. Ltd. , the matter stands adjourned. List on 27.9.2022. AVANI PAL SINGH Registrar
ITEM NO.2 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII-A S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Civil Appeal No(s). 7152-7153/2016 SAHARA INDIA COMMERCIAL CORPORATION LIMITED Appellant(s) VERSUS SAHARA GRACE CONSUMER GRIEVANCES ASSOCIATION & ANR. Respondent(s) (IA No. 72714/2022 - RELEASE OF THE FIXED DEPOSIT) Date : 02-09-2022 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT For Appellant(s) Mr. Pallav Sishodia, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, AOR Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Rohan Thawani, Adv. Ms. Pooja Dhar, AOR Mr. Pratul Pratap Singh, Adv. Mr. Mantavya Sharma, Adv. Ms. Supriya Juneja, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List these appeals along with connected matters, i.e. Civil Appeal Nos. 9224-9225 of 2016, before the appropriate Court consisting of two Hon’ble Judges of this Court. (NEETU KHAJURIA) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS (VIRENDER SINGH) COURT MASTER
ITEM NO.801 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII-A S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. No.72714 of 2022 In Civil Appeal Nos.7152-7153/2016 SAHARA INDIA COMMERCIAL CORPORATION LIMITED Appellant(s) VERSUS SAHARA GRACE CONSUMER GRIEVANCES ASSOCIATION & ANR. Respondent(s) Date : 24-08-2022 This matter was mentioned today.. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHANSHU DHULIA For Appellant(s) Mr. Gautam Talukdar, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Rohan Thawani, Adv. (Mentioned By) Ms. Pooja Dhar, AOR Mr. Pratul Pratap Singh, Adv. Mr. Mantavya Sharma, Adv. Ms. Supriya Juneja, AOR UPON mentioning the Court made the following O R D E R List on 02.09.2022. (MUKESH NASA) (VIRENDER SINGH) AR-cum-PS BRANCH OFFICER
ITEM NO.6 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR SH. AVANI PAL SINGH CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORP. LTD.(SIRCL) AND ORS.Respondent(s) (ONLY I.A.D NOS. 33170/2021 AND I.A. 11565/2022 IS TO BE LISTED BEFORE LD. REGISTRAR COURT. IA No. 33170/2021 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 11565/2022 - WITHDRAWAL OF CASE / APPLICATION) Date : 08-08-2022 These matters were called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) M/s. K J John And Co. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Akhit Abraham Roy, Adv. Mr. Vijay Valsan, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR Mrs.Pragya Baghel, AOR Mr. Kaushal Yadav, AOR Ms. Yashoda Katiyar, Adv. Mr. Amol Nirmalkumar Suryawanshi, AOR Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AOR Mr. Ashok Kumar, Adv. Mr. Raj Bahadur Yadav, AOR Mr. B. V. Balaram Das, AOR Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR Mr. Gautam Kumar, Adv. Ms. Mohini Kumari, Adv. Mr. Jatin Zaveri, AOR Mr. Gaurav Agrawal, AOR Mr. Preshit Vilas Surshe, AOR Mr. Sahil Tagotra, AOR Mr. Abhishek Pandey, Adv. Mr. Gautam Kumar, Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Devanshu Yadav, Adv.
Mr. Sameer Pandey, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Ms. Jasmine Damkewala, AOR Ms. Vaishali Sharma, Adv. Mr. Dinesh Chander Trehan, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel, the Court made the following O R D E R Fix the application for hearing. List on 07.09.2022. AVANI PAL SINGH Registrar
ITEM NO.8 COURT NO.5 SECTION X S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No.284/2022 ASHOK VINAYAK SAKALIKAR Petitioner(s) VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Respondent(s) WITH W.P.(C) No. 312/2022 (X) Date : 20-05-2022 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. SUNDRESH For Petitioner(s) Mr. Abhishek Krishna, Adv. Mr. Arvind S. Avhad, AOR For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Learned counsel for the petitioner states that in similar matters notice has been issued and tagged with W.P.(C) No.1424 of 2019. Issue notice. Tag with W.P.(C) No.1424 of 2019 (RASHMI DHYANI) (POONAM VAID) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER
ITEM NO.803 Court 3 (Video Conferencing) SECTION XIV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) Diary No(s). 29485/2021 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 15-01-2021 in WP(C) No. 670/2021 07-09-2021 in WP(C) No. 670/2021 passed by the High Court Of Delhi At New Delhi) KAMLESH KUMARI AGRAWAL & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Respondent(s) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.161222/2021-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No.162845/2021-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. and IA No.161221/2021-PERMISSION TO FILE PETITION (SLP/TP/WP/..) and IA No.162844/2021-APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION ) Date : 20-01-2022 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Sumeer Sodhi, AOR For Respondent(s) UPON being mentioned, the Court made the following O R D E R List this matter on 28.01.2022 before the appropriate Bench. (DEEPAK SINGH) (VIDYA NEGI) COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH)
ITEM NO.801 Court 6 (Video Conferencing) SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. No. 166294/2019 In CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORP. LTD.(SIRCL) AND ORS.Respondent(s) (For directions) Date : 27-09-2021 This matter was called on for mentioning today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. SUNDRESH For parties : Mr. Gaurav Agrawal, AOR Mr. Omkar Geedh, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Mentioning in this case will have to be done in terms of earlier orders before the appropriate Bench. [CHARANJEET KAUR] [POONAM VAID] ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH)
ITEM NO.802 Court 7 (Video Conferencing) SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CONMT.PET.(C) No.1820-1822/2017 in CONMT.PET.(C) No.413/2012 In C.A. No. 9833/2011 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUBRATA ROY SAHARA AND ORS. & ORS. Respondent(s) WITH W.P.(C) No.877/2018 Date : 06-08-2021 This petition was mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HRISHIKESH ROY For Petitioner(s) Mr. Bishwajit Bhattacharyya, Sr. Adv.(Mentioned by) M/S. K J John And Co, AOR Mr. Aniruddha P. Mayee, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR Mr. Kunal Cheema, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R W.P.(C) No.877/2018 The mentioning slip shows that the matter has to be listed before a Bench of Hon’ble The Chief Justice of India and the present petition is tagged with those proceedings. The Registry may obtain appropriate orders from Hon’ble The Chief Justice of India and, if required, as suggested by learned senior counsel, the mentioning slip can be placed before Hon’ble The Chief Justice of India. (RASHMI DHYANI) (POONAM VAID) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER
ITEM NO.1 Court 13 (Video Conferencing) SECTION X S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Writ Petition (Civil) No.1333/2020 ARCHANA MANE & ANR. Petitioner(s) VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Respondent(s) (FOR ADMISSION) WITH W.P.(C) No. 1427/2020 (X) (FOR ADMISSION) Date : 28-07-2021 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. BOPANNA For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind S. Avhad, AOR Mr. Rajat Kapoor, Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Tag along with Writ Petition (C) No.1424 of 2019. (TUSHAR BISHT) (RENU BALA GAMBHIR) COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH)
ITEM NO.801 Court 7 (Video Conferencing) SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IA Nos. 114416/2017 and IA. 114427/2017 IN CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORP. LTD.(SIRCL) AND ORS.Respondent(s) (with I.A. No. 16794 of 2020 in C.P(c) 1820-1822/2017 in C.P(C) 412 & 413 of 2012 and 260/2013 in C.A. No. 9813 & 9833/2011 and 8643/2012 Advocates- Ms. Jasmine Damkewala, Mr. B.V. Balramdas, Mr. Shekhar Naphade, Sr. ADvocate (Amicus Curaie) [FOR INTERVENTION/DIRECTIONS] Date : 22-07-2021 These applications were mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA For Applicant(s) Mr. Amol N. Suryawanshi, AOR (Mentioned By) For Petitioner(s) M/S. K J John And Co, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR Mr. Preshit Vilas Surshe, AOR Ms. Jasmine Damkewala, AOR Mrs. Pragya Baghel, AOR Mr. B. V. Balaram Das, AOR Mr. Jatin Zaveri, AOR Mr. Gaurav Agrawal, AOR Mr. Sahil Tagotra, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List the applications along with the main matter (C.P.(C) Nos. 412 & 413/2012). [CHARANJEET KAUR] [POONAM VAID] ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH)
ITEM NO.803 Court 7 (Video Conferencing) SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORP. LTD.(SIRCL) AND ORS. Respondent(s) (MM---07.04.2021---CP(C)-413/12---CP(C)-260/13---IA-160939/18---IA- 58012/18---9/801] THE MATTER TO BE LISTED BEFORE THREE JUDGES BENCH COMPRISING REGULAR DIVISION BENCH OF HON'BLE SKK, J AND HON' VR, J(NOMINATED BY HON' THE CJI) ) IA NO.87559/2017- CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION Date : 19-07-2021 This application was mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA For Petitioner(s) M/S. K J John And Co, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Rohan Thawani, Adv.(mentioned by) applicant Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AOR Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR Mrs. Pragya Baghel, AOR Mr. Jatin Zaveri, AOR Mr. Gaurav Agrawal, AOR Mr. Sahil Tagotra, AOR Mr. Preshit Vilas Surshe, AOR Ms. Jasmine Damkewala, AOR Mr. Rohan Thawani UPON being mentioned the Court made the following O R D E R List on 26.07.2021. (ASHA SUNDRIYAL) (POONAM VAID) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH)
ITEM NO.801 Court 9 (Video Conferencing) SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. No. 35238/2021 IN CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORP. LTD.(SIRCL) AND ORS.Respondent(s) With CP (C) No. 413/2012 & CP(C) No. 260/2013 with IA Nos. 160939/2018 & IA No. 58012/2018 Date : 07-04-2021 These matters were mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA For Petitioner(s) M/S. K J John And Co, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR Mr. Preshit Vilas Surshe, AOR Ms. Jasmine Damkewala, AOR (Mentioned BY) Mrs. Pragya Baghel, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List on 27.04.2021. (CHARANJEET KAUR) (POONAM VAID) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH)
ITEM NO.7 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR SH. RAJESH KUMAR GOEL CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORP. LTD.(SIRCL) AND ORS.Respondent(s) (I.A.D. No. 116949/2020 in Ct. PT. 412 IA No. 116949/2020 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS) WITH CONMT.PET.(C) No. 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9833/2011 (XVII) (FOR ON IA 107867/2012 FOR STAY APPLICATION ON IA 1/2013 IA No. 1/2013 - STAY APPLICATION) CONMT.PET.(C) No. 260/2013 In C.A. No. 8643/2012 (XVII) ([TO BE TAKEN UP ALONGWITH CONMT.PET.(C)NO. 1820-1822/2017]) Date : 08-02-2021 These matters were called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr Akhil Abraham Roy, Adv. Mr Vijay Valson, Adv. M/S. K J John And Co, AOR For Respondent(s) Ms Neha Agarwal, Adv. Mrs. Shally Bhasin, AOR Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR Mr Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Mr Devanshu Yadav, Adv. Mr Vijay Kumar, Adv. Mr. Prashant Kumar, AOR Mr Sahil Jodhwani, Adv. Mr. Preshit Vilas Surshe, AOR Ms. Jasmine Damkewala, AOR Ms Vaishali Sharma, Adv. Mrs. Pragya Baghel, AOR Ms Samten Doma, Adv. Mr Salim Ambar Inamdar, Adv. Ms Jyoti Mehra, Adv.
-2- Item No.7 For applicants Mr Prafulla Kumar Behera, Adv. Mr S.S.Nehra, AOR Mr Vikrant Nehra, Adv. Mr Manish Kumar Bhardwaj, Adv. Ms Tanisha Tyagi, Adv. Ms Versha Yadav, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel through Video Conference, the Court made the following O R D E R Unregistered application IA D.No.116949/2020 is allowed to be withdrawn. RAJESH KUMAR GOEL Registrar
ITEM NO.23 Court 14 (Video Conferencing) SECTION X S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s). 1424/2019 ANIRUDDHA Petitioner(s) VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Respondent(s) (OFFICE REPORT ON DEFAULT IS TO BE LISTED IN WP.(C) NO. 1123/2020 ONLY) WITH W.P.(C) No. 1123/2020 (X) (FOR ADMISSION) Date : 11-01-2021 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HRISHIKESH ROY [IN CHAMBER] For Petitioner(s) Mr. Rajat Kapoor, Adv. Mr. Arvind S. Avhad, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Shreyash Lalit, Adv. Mr. Rahul Chitnis, Adv. Mr. Sachin Patil, AOR Mr. Aaditya A. Pande, Adv. Mr. Geo Joseph, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R W.P.(C) No. 1123/2020 Delay in furnishing spare copies stands condoned. The Registry should proceed accordingly. (JAGDISH KUMAR) (R.S. NARAYANAN) SENIOR PERSONAL ASSISTANT COURT MASTER (NSH)
ITEM NO.10 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE SECTION X S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR SH. ANIL LAXMAN PANSARE Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s). 1424/2019 ANIRUDDHA Petitioner(s) VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Respondent(s) WITH W.P.(C) No. 1459/2019 (X) W.P.(C) No. 1 123/2020 (X) (FOR ADMISSION) Date : 10 - 12 - 2020 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind S. Avhad, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Aaditya A. Pande, Adv. Mr. Rahul Chitnis, Adv. Mr. Geo Joseph, Adv. Mr. Sachin Patil, AOR UPON hearing the counsel through Video Conference, the Court made the following O R D E R W.P.(C)No.1424 and 1459/2019 Last opportunity is granted to respondent No.2 in W.P.(C)No.1424/2019 for filing counter affidavit within four weeks. Four weeks’ time is granted to respondent No.2 in W.P.(C)No.1459/2019 for filing counter affidavit. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner to fi le affidavit of dasti service in respect of respondent Nos.1 and 3 to 5 in both the matters within four weeks, as last opportunity.
Item No.10 - 2 - W.P.(C) No. 1123/2020 Spare copies have not been filed. Registry to process the matter for listing bef ore the Hon’ble Judge in Chamber for orders. ANIL LAXMAN PANSARE Registrar
ITEM NO.2 Court 1 (Video Conferencing) SECTION X S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s). 1123/2020 APPARAO Petitioner(s) VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Respondent(s) (FOR ADMISSION ) Date : 19-11-2020 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. BOPANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN For Petitioner(s) Mr. Rajat Kapoor,Adv. Mr. Arvind S. Avhad, AOR For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Issue notice. Tag with W.P.(C)No. 1424 of 2019. (MADHU BALA) (INDU KUMARI POKHRIYAL) AR-CUM-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
ITEM NO.8 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE SECTION X S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR SH. ANIL LAXMAN PANSARE Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s). 1424/2019 ANIRUDDHA Petitioner(s) VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Respondent(s) WITH W.P.(C) No. 1459/2019 (X) Date : 05 - 11 - 2020 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind S. Avhad, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Sachin Patil, AOR UPON hearing the counsel through Video Conference, the Court made the following O R D E R Both matters Respondent Nos.1 to 5 are common respondents. Four weeks' time is granted to respondent No.2 for filing counter affidavit. Ld. Counsel fo r the petitioner to file affidavit of dasti service in respect of respondent Nos.1 and 3 to 5 within four weeks. List again on 10.12.2020. ANIL LAXMAN PANSARE Regis trar
ITEM NO.10 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE SECTION X S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A BEFORE THE REGISTRAR SH. AVANI PAL SINGH WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) Diary No(s). 43885/2019 APPARAO Petitioner(s) VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Respondent(s) (FOR ADMISSION and IA No.37506/2020-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN REFILING / CURING THE DEFECTS IA No. 37506/2020 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN REFILING / CURING THE DEFECTS) Date : 25-09-2020 These matters were called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind S. Avhad, AOR For Respondent(s) O R D E R Not connected. Having examined the materials on record and in terms of the prayer made, delay of 50 days in refiling is condoned. Process as per rules. AVANI PAL SINGH Registrar
1 ITEM NO.13 Court 7 (Video Conferencing) SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CONMT.PET.(C) No. 1820-1822/2017 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9833/2011 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUBRATA ROY SAHARA AND ORS. & ORS. Respondent(s) IN CONTEMPT PETITION © NO.260/2013, IN CONT. PET.© NO.412/2012, IN CONTMP. PET © NO.412/2012, (ONLY W.P (c) NO. 877/2018 TO BE LISTED AGAINST THIS MATTER ) WITH W.P.(C) No. 877/2018 (FOR ADMISSION) Date : 29-07-2020 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA BOSE For Petitioner(s) Mr. Bishwajit Bhattacharyya, Sr. Adv. Mrs. Sharmila Upadhyay, AOR Mr. Pawan R. Upadhyay, Adv. Mr. Sarvjit Pratap Singh, Adv. For M/S. Unuc Legal Llp, AOR Mr. Pratap Venugopal,Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Ms. Ayushi Gaur, Adv. Mr. Akhil Abraham Roy, Adv. For M/S. K J John And Co, AOR Mr. Aniruddha P. Mayee, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Vikas Singh,Sr.Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR Mr. Ayush Choudhary,Adv. Mr. Devanshu Yadav,Adv. Mr. Sameer Pandey,Adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi,Adv. Mr. Ram Sajan,Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar,Adv. Mr. Rana Mukherjee, Sr. Adv. Mr. D.L. Chidanand, Adv.
2 Mr. Kanu Agrawal, Adv. Mr. P.V. Yogeshwaran, Adv. Ms. Anil Katiyar, Adv. Mr. A.K. Sharma, Adv. Mr. Kunal Cheema, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R W.P (c) NO. 877/2018 The office report shows that the matter has to be listed before a Bench which was in seisin of I.A. NOS.253-255/2017 in Contempt Petition (c) Nos.412-413/2012. Learned counsel for the petitioner draws our attention to paragraph 8 of the petition to contend that he has already stated the he would like to withdraw those applications. Be that as it may, there is no reason why this matter should be taken up separately from the contempt matter which is pending. Thus, this matter be also listed before the same Bench and on the same date when the other matters come up. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that the matter has not been listed for some time. It has only come up now. If that be the position, it is for the petitioner to make the necessary mentioning for this matter be taken up, as aforesaid, since the other matters are pending before a Bench presided by Hon’ble the Chief Justice. (ASHA SUNDRIYAL) (ANITA RANI AHUJA) AR CUM PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
ITEM NO.2 REGISTRAR COURT. Registrar Virtual Court - 1 SECTION X S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR SH. ANIL LAXMAN PANSARE WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) Diary No(s). 43885/2019 APPARAO Petitioner(s) VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Respondent(s) (FOR ADMISSION and IA No.37506/2020 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN REFILING / CURING THE DEFECTS ) Date : 06 - 07 - 2020 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind S. Avhad, AOR For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay in refiling is condoned. Process as per rules. ANIL LAXMAN PANSARE Registrar
1 ITEM NO.36 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CONMT.PET.(C) No. 1820-1822/2017 in CONMT.PET.(C) Nos 412/2012 & 413/2012 In C.A. Nos. 9813/2011 & 9833/2011 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUBRATA ROY SAHARA & ORS. Respondent(s) AND CONTEMPT PETITION (C) No. 260/2013 IN C.A. NO. 8643/2012 WITH IA No. 50392/2018 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT) IA No. 50393/2018 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 50405/2018 – CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 55525/2018 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 55526/2018 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 65863/2018 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IN CONTEMPT PETITION © NOS. 1820-1822/2017 WITH I.A. NOS. 88721/2017 & 87599 OF 2017 (APPLN(S). FOR APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS) I.A. NOS. 30932, 48224, 48235, 54921, 138094, 134546 & 129469/2018 (APPLN(S). FOR DIRECTIONS, IMPLEADMENT & DIRECTION AND MODIFICATION) WITH I.A. NOS. 69646, 69648 & 11181/2018 (APPLN(S). FOR IMPLEADMENT AND DIRECTIONS) IN CONTEMPT PETITION © NOS. 412 & 413 OF 2012 AND 260/2013 IN C.A. NOS. 9813, 9833/2011 AND 8643/2012 WITH MA 1364-1365/2017 in C.A. Nos. 9813/2011 & 9833/2011 (XVII) (IA No. 123568/2017 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS) Date : 24-01-2020 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.R. GAVAI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P, Datar, Sr. Adv.
2 Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Ayushi Gaur, Adv. Mr. Akhil Abraham, Adv. Mr. Vijay Valsan, Adv. For M/S. K J John And Co, AOR Mr. Aniruddha P. Mayee, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. V. Giri, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Devanshu Yadav, Adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Sameer Pandey, Adv. Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Mr. Alok Kumar Pandey, Adv. Mr. Tushar Mehta, Ld. S.G. Mr. Rana Mukherjee, Sr. Adv. Mr. D.C. Chidanand, Adv. Mr. Kanu Agrawal, Adv. Mr. P.V. Yogeswaran, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar, AOR Mr. A.K. Sharma, Adv. Mr. Sanjay Jain, Ld. ASG Ms. Rekha Pandy, Adv. Mr. B.V. Balramdas, Adv. Mr. Sanjeev Sen, Sr. Adv. Mr. Yunus Malik, Adv. Mr. Anish Maheshwari, Adv. Mr. Samir Malik, AOR. Mr. Kunal Cheema, AOR Ms. Aditi Deshpande, Adv. Mr. Rahul Kumar, Adv. Mr. Chaitanya Singh, Adv. Mr. Ilesh Shukla, Adv. Mr. Prince W. Lama, Adv. Mr. Vishnu Singh, Adv. Mr. Ramesh Babu M.R., Adv. Ms. Manisha Singh, Adv. Ms. Nisha Sharma, Adv.
3 Ms. Binu Tamta,Adv. Mr. Dhruv Tamta, Adv. Mr. G. Umapathy, Adv. Ms. Vaishnavi V., Adv. Mr. Rakesh K. Sharma, Adv. Ms. Pavitra B., Adv. Mr. Biswajit Bhattacharya, Sr. Adv. Ms. Sharmila Upadhyay,Adv. Mr. Sarvjit Pratap Singh, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Issue notice in application Nos. 69646 and 69648/2018. List on a non-miscellaneous day in the month of April, 2020 along with WP© No. 877/2018. Shri Sanjiv Sen, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of C. Madan Raj (applicant in IA 87599/2017), has handed over a cheque, bearing No. 213063 of Rs. 41,58,99,001/- (Rupees Fourty One Crore Fifty Eight lakhs, Ninety Nine Thousand and One Rupee only) of State Bank of India drawn in favour of “SEBI Sahara Refund Account” to learned counsel appearing for Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI), which is accepted without prejudice. Until further orders the personal presence of alleged contemnors is dispensed with. [ CHARANJEET KAUR ] [ INDU KUMARI POKHRIYAL ] A.R.-CUM-P.S. ASSTT. REGISTRAR
ITEM NO.10 COURT NO.1 SECTION X S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s). 1424/2019 ANIRUDDHA Petitioner(s) VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Respondent(s) WITH W.P.(C) No. 1459/2019 (X) (FOR ADMISSION) Date : 20-01-2020 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.R. GAVAI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind S. Avhad, AOR Mr. karri Venkata Reddy, Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Issue notice. Dasti, in addition, is permitted. (SANJAY KUMAR-II) (INDU KUMARI POKHRIYAL) COURT MASTER (SH) ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
ITEM NO.801 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CONMT.PET.(C) No. 1820-1822/2017 in CONMT.PET.(C) No.412 and 413/2012 and 260/2013 In C.A. Nos.9813 and 9833 and 8643 of 2012 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUBRATA ROY SAHARA AND ORS. & ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 15-01-2020 These petitions were mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.R. GAVAI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT For Petitioner(s) Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Mr. Akhil abraham Roy, Adv. For M/S. K J John And Co, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List on 24.01.2020 instead of 17.01.2020 before appropriate Bench. [ CHARANJEET KAUR ] [ INDU KUMARI POKHRIYAL ] A.R.-CUM-P.S. ASSTT. REGISTRAR
ITEM NO.803 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NOS.1820-1822/2017 IN CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NOS.412 AND 413 OF 2012 AND 260 OF 2013 IN CIVIL APPEAL NOS.9813 AND 9833/2011 AND 8643 OF 2012 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUBRATA ROY SAHARA AND ORS. & ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 10-01-2020 These petitions were mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.R. GAVAI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv. (mentioned by) Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Mr. Akhil Abraham Roy, Adv. For M/s K J John And Co, AOR For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R As prayed for, list the instant contempt petitions on 17.01.2020 before the appropriate Bench. (SANJAY KUMAR-II) (INDU KUMARI POKHRIYAL) COURT MASTER (SH) ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
ITEM NO.4 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION X S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR SH. RAJIV KALRA WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) Diary No(s). 32668/2019 VIJAY RAMCHANDRA RATHOD Petitioner(s) VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Respondent(s) (FOR ADMISSION and IA No.182277/2019-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN REFILING / CURING THE DEFECTS ) Date : 09-12-2019 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind S. Avhad, AOR Mr. Karri Venkata Reddy,Adv. Mr. Abhishek Krishna,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Appearance: Ld. Counsel is present on behalf of petitioner. Delay in refiling the petition is condoned. Registry to proceed further. RAJIV KALRA Registrar MG
ITEM NO.5 COURT NO.16 SECTION X S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Writ Petition (Civil) No(s).1424/2019 ANIRUDDHA Petitioner(s) VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 09-12-2019 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDU MALHOTRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind S. Avhad,AOR Mr. Karri Venkata Reddy,Adv. Mr. Abhishek Krishna,Adv. Mr. Rajat Kapoor,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R We have been informed by learned counsel for the petitioner that the Contempt Petition (C) No.412/2012 is pending before the Bench presided over by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rohinton Fali Nariman. This matter may also be placed before the same Bench. (Sunil Kumar Rajvanshi) (Sarita Purohit) Branch Officer AR-cum-PS
ITEM NO.7 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION X S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR SH. ANIL LAXMAN PANSARE WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) Diary No(s). 33395/2019 ANIRUDDHA Petitioner(s) VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Respondent(s) (FOR ADMISSION and IA No.177863/2019-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN REFILING / CURING THE DEFECTS ) Date : 02-12-2019 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr Karri Venkata Reddy, Adv. Mr. Arvind S. Avhad, AOR For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay in refiling is condoned. Process as per rules. ANIL LAXMAN PANSARE Registrar
ITEM NO.815 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. No. 30932/2018 In CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 & 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 and 9833/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORP. LTD.(SIRC Respondent(s) AND IA NO. 87599/2017 & IA NO….D. No. 11181/2018 in CP© No. 260/2013 in CA 8643/2012 Date : 28-11-2019 These applications were mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.R. GAVAI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT Counsel for the parties : Ms. Binu Tamta, Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Yunus Mali, Adv. Mr. Anish Maheshwari, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List after four weeks before appropriate Bench. [ CHARANJEET KAUR ] [ INDU KUMARI POKHRIYAL ] A.R.-CUM-P.S. ASSTT. REGISTRAR
ITEM NO.813 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. No. 69646/2018, 69648/2018 In CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORP. LTD.(SIRC Respondent(s) Date : 20-11-2019 These applications were mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT Counsel for parties : Mr. G. Umapathy, Adv. Mr. Rakesh K Sharma, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List after four weeks before appropriate Bench. [ CHARANJEET KAUR ] [ INDU KUMARI POKHRIYAL ] A.R.-CUM-P.S. ASSTT. REGISTRAR
ITEM NO.1 COURT NO.7 SECTION XVII-A S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Civil Appeal Nos.7152-7153/2016 SAHARA INDIA COMMERCIAL CORPORATION LIMITED Appellant(s) VERSUS SAHARA GRACE CONSUMER GRIEVANCES ASSOCIATION & ANR.Respondent(s) Date : 21-10-2019 These appeals were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA BOSE Counsel for the Parties: Mr. Gautam Talukdar, AOR Mr. Rohan Thawani, Adv. Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AOR Mr. Hardeep Singh Anand, Adv. Ms. Gunjan Ahuja, Adv. Mr. Iqram Govind Singh, Adv. Ms. Supriya Juneja, AOR Ms. Meghna Rao, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Perused the office report dated 28.09.2019. The amount in question which is presently lying in fixed deposit with UCO Bank, Supreme Court Branch, New Delhi, be renewed for a further period of 91 days with auto renewal facility. (MUKESH NASA) (SUMAN JAIN) COURT MASTER BRANCH OFFICER
ITEM NO.1 COURT NO.8 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Civil Appeal NoS.7152-7153/2016 SAHARA INDIA COMMERCIAL CORPORATION LIMITED Appellant(s) VERSUS SAHARA GRACE CONSUMER GRIEVANCES ASSOCIATION & ANR. Respondent(s) Date : 22-07-2019 These appeals were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEET SARAN For Appellant(s) Mr. Gautam Talukdar, AOR For Respondent(s) Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AOR Mr. Suryakant Singla, Adv. Ms. Supriya Juneja, AOR Mr. Aditya Singla, Adv. Ms. Varsha Poddar, Adv. Mr. Rohan Thawani, Adv. Mr. Iqram Govind Singh, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Perused the office report dated 01.07.2019. The amount of Rs.1,86,61,987/- along with interest accrued thereon be reinvested in fixed deposit with UCO Bank, Supreme Court Branch, New Delhi for a period of 91 days. (MUKESH NASA) (SUMAN JAIN) COURT MASTER BRANCH OFFICER
ITEM NO.4 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR AVANI PAL SINGH Civil Appeal No(s). 7152-7153/2016 SAHARA INDIA COMMERCIAL CORPORATION LIMITED Appellant(s) VERSUS SAHARA GRACE CONSUMER GRIEVANCES ASSOCIATION & ANR.Respondent(s) (for FDR orders only in C.A. Nos. 7152-53 of 2016) Date : 01-04-2019 These appeals were called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Gautam Talukdar, AOR For Respondent(s) Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AOR Ms Cheshta Jetly, Adv. Ms. Supriya Juneja, AOR Ms Gunjan Ahuja, Adv. Mr Rohan Thawani, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R FDR may be renewed for a further period of 91 days from the due date of its maturity. AVANI PAL SINGH Registrar
1 ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NOS. 1820-1822/2017 IN CONTEMPT PETITION (C) NOS.412 AND 413 OF 2012 AND 260 OF 2013 IN CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 9813 AND 9833/2011 AND 8643 OF 2012 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA PETITIONER(S) VERSUS SUBRATA ROY SAHARA & ORS. RESPONDENT(S) (WITH I.A. NO. 88721/2017 (APPLICATION FOR DIRECTIONS) AND I.A. NO. 54921/2018, 48224 AND 48235 OF 2018 (APPLICATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME OF PAYMENT, IMPLEADMENT AND DIRECTION) AND I.A. NOS. 138094/2018, 134546 & 129469/2018 [FOR DIRECTION AND MODIFICATION I.A. NO.50405/2018 – CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION I.A. NO.50393/2018 – CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION I.A.NO.50392/2018 – INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT) WITH MA 1364-1365/2017 IN CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 9813 AND 9833 OF 2011 (FOR FOR APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS ON IA 123568/2017) Date : 31-01-2019 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL Mr. Shekhar Naphade, Sr. Adv. (A/C) Ms. Shubhangi Tuli, Adv. For parties : Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Ms. Deepika, Adv. Mr. Varun Singh, Adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav, Adv. Mr. Devanshu Yadav, Adv. Ms. Mahima Deepak, Adv.
2 Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Varun Singh, Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Purushottam Kumar Jha, Adv. Mr. N. Prashant Kumar Nair, Adv. Ms. Remya Raj, Adv. for M/S. K J John And Co, AOR Mr. Aniruddha P. Mayee, AOR Mr. Kunal Cheema, AOR Ms. Aditi Deshpande Parkhi, Adv. Mr. Rana Mukherjee, Sr. Adv. Mr. D.L. Chidananda, Adv. Ms. Sadhana Sandhu, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar, AOR Mr. A.K. Sharma, Adv. Mr. Paras Kuhad, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gaurav Agarwal, AOR Mr. Jitin Chaturvedi, Adv. Mr. S. Husain, Adv. Mr. Paras Kuhad, Sr. Adv. Mr. Omkar G., Adv. Mr. Gaurav Agarwal, AOR Mr. G. Umapathy, Adv. Mr. Rakesh K. Sharma, AOR. Ms. Binu Tamta, AOR Mr. Manoj K. Mishra, Adv. Mr. Onkar Nath, Adv. Mr. Umesh Dubey, Adv. Mr. Ramesh Babu M.R., AOR Ms. Manisha Singh, Adv. Ms. Swati Setia, Adv.
3 Mr. Yunus Malik, Adv. Mr. Anish Maheshwari, Adv. Ms. Khushali, Adv. Mr. Samir Malik, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The matter has been listed after almost six months for reasons that we need not go into at this stage. However, what has transpired in the meantime does not inspire the confidence of the Court that the order of this Court for deposit of Rs.25,700 odd crore, which has also been reiterated subsequently, is intended to be complied with. The suggestion of Shri Vikas Singh, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the contemnors that there should be a verification of the amount paid is an argument which has been made on several occasions earlier and has been kept pending for consideration in the light of the orders passed that such verification would follow only after deposit of the principal amount of Rs.25,700 odd crore. We are told by the learned counsel appearing for the SEBI that out of Rs.25,700 odd crore only about Rs.15,000 crore have been paid and the balance amount out of about Rs.20,000 crore is the interest amount.
4 In these circumstances, we decline to pass any order but direct for the personal appearance of the contemnors in Court on the next date fixed. We make it clear that the contemnors have been summoned to the Court to enable the Court to pass appropriate orders so that the law can take its own course and reach the desired conclusion. The matter be listed again on 28 th February, 2019 at 2.00 p.m. I.A. NO.54921 of 2018 IN CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.412 & 413 OF 2012 The applicants – M/s Sai Rydem Realtors Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Prime Downtown Estates Pvt. Ltd. are permitted to deposit the amount of Rs.235 crores (approximately) within two weeks from today in the SEBI SAHARA Account and on full satisfaction that all dues have been paid, necessary sale documents may be executed. I.A. No.54921 of 2018 for extension of time is disposed of in the above terms. [VINOD LAKHINA] [ANAND PRAKASH] AR-cum-PS BRANCH OFFICER
ITEM NO.21 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR ANIL LAXMAN PANSARE Civil Appeal No(s). 7152-7153/2016 SAHARA INDIA COMMERCIAL CORPORATION LIMITED Appellant(s) VERSUS SAHARA GRACE CONSUMER GRIEVANCES ASSOCIATION & ANR.Respondent(s) (for FDR orders ) Date : 02-01-2019 These appeals were called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Ms Rhea Dube, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, AOR For Respondent(s) Ms Gunjan Ahuja, Adv. Mr Rohan Thawani, Adv. Mr Iqram Govind Singh, Adv. Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AOR Ms Varsha Poddar, Adv. Ms. Supriya Juneja, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R FDR is renewed for a further period of 91 days from the due date of its maturity. ANIL LAXMAN PANSARE Registrar
ITEM NO.2 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. RAJESH KUMAR GOEL Civil Appeal No(s). 7152-7153/2016 SAHARA INDIA COMMERCIAL CORPORATION LIMITED Appellant(s) VERSUS SAHARA GRACE CONSUMER GRIEVANCES ASSOCIATION & ANR.Respondent(s) (for FDR orders only in C.A. No. 7152-53/2016.) Date : 01-10-2018 These appeals were called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Gautam Talukdar, AOR For Respondent(s) Ms Gunjan Ahuja, Adv. Mr Rohan Thawani, Adv. Mr Anand Dagga, Adv. Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AOR Ms Varsha Poddar, Adv. Ms. Supriya Juneja, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R FDR is renewed for a further period of 91 days from the due date of its maturity. RAJESH KUMAR GOEL Registrar
ITEM NO.825 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CONMT.PET.(C) No.412/2012 In C.A. No.9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 17-09-2018 This petition was MENTIONED today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKAR HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUD For Petitioner(s) M/s. K J John And Co. For Respondent(s) Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R On mentioning, the matter is taken on Board. List the matter next week before the appropriate Bench as per the roster. (Chetan Kumar) (H.S. Parasher) A.R.-cum-P.S. Assistant Registrar
ITEM NO.30 COURT NO.2 SECTION X S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s). 877/2018 VANDANA BHARRGAVA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SECURITIES EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA (SEBI) Respondent(s) (FOR ADMISSION) Date : 03-08-2018 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN SINHA For Petitioner(s) Mr. Bishwajit Bhattacharyya, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pawan Upadyay, Adv. Mr. Savjit Pratap Singh, Adv. Mr. Ratik Sharma, Adv. For M/s. UNUC Legal LLP, AOR For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List the matter before the Court which is in seisin of the applications i.e I.A.Nos. 253-255 of 2017 in Contempt Petition Nos. 412-413 of 2012. (NEETU KHAJURIA) COURT MASTER (ASHA SONI) BRANCH OFFICER
ITEM NO.75 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. KAPIL MEHTA Civil Appeal No(s). 7152-7153/2016 SAHARA INDIA COMMERCIAL CORPORATION LIMITED Appellant(s) VERSUS SAHARA GRACE CONSUMER GRIEVANCES ASSOCIATION & ANR.Respondent(s) (For FDR orders only in C.A. No. 7152-53 of 2016.) Date : 16-07-2018 These appeals were called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Gautam Talukdar, AOR For Respondent(s) Ms. Gunjan Ahuja, Adv. Mr. Rohan Thawani, Adv. Mr. Anand Daga, Adv. Mr. Hardeep Singh Anand, Adv. Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AOR Ms. Supriya Juneja, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R F.D.R. be renewed for a further period of 91 days from the due date of its maturity. KAPIL MEHTA Registrar 16.7.2018 rd
ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CONMT.PET.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 in CONMT.PET.(C) Nos. 412 and 413/2012 In C.A. Nos. 9813 and 9833/2011 AND CONMT.PET.(C)No. 260/2013 in C.A.No. 8643/2012 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUBRATA ROY SAHARA & ORS. Respondent(s) (with I.A. No.88721/2017 (application for directions) and I.A. No.54921/2018, 48224 and 48235 of 2018 (application for extension of time of payment, impleadment and direction) in Ct. Pt. 412 and 413/2012 and 260/2013 in C.A.NOS. 9813 AND 9833/2011 AND 8643/2012, MR. SHEKHAR NAPHADE, SR. ADV.(AC), MR. GAUTAM AWASTHI) WITH [ITEM NO.301.1 – M.A.Nos.1364-1365/2017 in C.A. Nos.9813/2011 and 9833/2011 (XVII) (FOR APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS ON IA 123568/2017)]. Date : 12-07-2018 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI Amicus Curiae(s) Mr. Shekhar Naphade, Sr. Adv. Ms. Shubhangi Tuli, Adv. Mr. Vikram Sobti, Adv. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P.Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Purushottam Kumar Jha, Adv. Mr. Anuj Sarma, Adv. Ms. Niharika,Adv. Ms. Kanika Kalaiyarasan, Adv. for M/s. K J John And Co., Advs. [AOR]
C.P.(C)Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. ... (contd.) - 2 - Mr. Danius Khambatta, Sr. Adv. Mr. C.S. Vaidyanathan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Rashmikant, Adv. Mr. Aniruddha P. Mayee, Adv. [AOR] Mr. Chirag Jain, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. [AOR] Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Ms. Deepika, Adv. Mr. Varun Singh, Adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav, Adv. Mr. Devanshu Yadav, Adv. Ms. Mahima Deepak, Adv. Mr. S. Venkatesh, Adv. Mr. Aditya Gupta, Adv. Ms. Alya Khan, ADv. Mr. Vivek Vashi, Adv. Mr. Biswajit Bhattacharya, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pawan Upadhyay, Adv. Mr. Sarvjit Pratap Singh, Adv. Mr. Vishnu Sharma, Adv. Ms. Anupama Sharma, Adv. Ms. Sonali Negi, Adv. Mr. Mohit Rai, Adv. Mr. Akhileshwar Jha, Adv. Mr. D.L. Chidananda, Adv. Ms. Sadhana Sandhu, Adv. Ms. Anil Katiyar, Adv./ Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, Adv. [AOR] Mr. Ramesh Babu M.R., Adv. Ms. Manisha, Adv. Ms. Swati Setia, Adv. For Applicant(s) Mr. Paras Kuhad, Sr. Adv. Mr. Jitin Chaturvedi, Adv. Ms. Aditi Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Shuaib Hussain, Adv.
C.P.(C)Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. ... (contd.) - 3 - Mr. Dhruv Mehta, Sr. Adv. Mr. Rajesh Kumar-I, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Anant Gautam, Adv. Mr. Aakash Sehrawat, Adv. Mr. V. Govinda Ramanan, Adv. Mr. Anmol Mehta, Adv. Mr. Vinod Kapoor, Adv. Ms. Vijayalakshmi Menon, Adv. [AOR] Mr. Kunal Cheema, Adv. Mr. Apoorv Shukla, Adv. Mr. Manoj K. Mishra, Adv. Mr. Umesh Dubey, Adv. Mr. Pradeep Kumar Dubey, Adv. Mr. Bheem Singh, Adv. Ms. Jasmine Damkewala, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R 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. 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. 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
C.P.(C)Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. ... (contd.) - 4 - 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. SEBI is permitted to replenish the expenses made by it. SEBI shall also pay the expenses incurred by the Receiver as
C.P.(C)Nos. 1820-1822/2017 etc. ... (contd.) - 5 - well as the Liquidator. Needless to say, the account of the same shall be furnished to the contemnor. Let the matter be listed at 02:00 p.m. on 14.09.2018. (Subhash Chander) (H.S. Parasher) AR-cum-PS Assistant Registrar
ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CONMT.PET.(C) Nos. 18201822/2017 in CONMT.PET.(C) Nos. 412 and 413/2012 In C.A. Nos. 9813 and 9833/2011 AND CONMT.PET.(C)No. 260/2013 in C.A.No. 8643/2012 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUBRATA ROY SAHARA & ORS. Respondent(s) (with I.A. No.88721/2017 (application for directions) and I.A. No.54921/2018, 48224 and 48235 of 2018 (application for extension of time of payment, impleadment and direction) in Ct. Pt. 412 and 413/2012 and 260/2013 in C.A.NOS. 9813 AND 9833/2011 AND 8643/2012, MR. SHEKHAR NAPHADE, SR. ADV.(AC), MR. GAUTAM AWASTHI) WITH [ITEM NO.301.1 – M.A.Nos.13641365/2017 in C.A. Nos.9813/2011 and 9833/2011 (XVII) (FOR APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS ON IA 123568/2017)]. Date : 16052018 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI Amicus Curiae(s) Mr. Shekhar Naphade, Sr. Adv. Ms. Shubhangi Tuli, Adv. Mr. Vikram Sobti, Adv. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P.Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Purushottam Kumar Jha, Adv. Mr. Anuj Sarma, Adv. Ms. Niharika,Adv. Ms. Kanika Kalaiyarasan, Adv. for M/s. K J John And Co., Advs. [AOR]
C.P.(C)Nos. 18201822/2017 etc. ... (contd.) 2 Mr. P.K. Dhakephalkar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Rashmikant, Adv. Mr. Aniruddha P. Mayee, Adv. [AOR] Mr. Avnish Oza, Adv. Mr. Chirag Jain, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. [AOR] Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Ms. Deepika, Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Varun Singh, Adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav, Adv. Mr. Devanshu Yadav, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv. Mr. Shyam Divan, Sr. Adv. Ms. Alya Khan, ADv. Mr. Vivek Vashi, Adv. Mr. Biswajit Bhattacharya, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pawan Upadhyay, Adv. Mr. Sarvjit Pratap Singh, Adv. Mr. Vishnu Sharma, Adv. Ms. Anupama Sharma, Adv. Ms. Sonali Negi, Adv. Mr. Mohit Rai, Adv. Mr. Rana Mukherjee, Sr. Adv. Mr. D.L. Chidananda, Adv. Ms. Sadhana Sandhu, Adv. Ms. Anil Katiyar, Adv. Mr. M.K. Maroria, Adv. [AOR] Mr. Ramesh Babu M.R., Adv. Ms. Manisha, Adv. Ms. Swati Setia, Adv. For Applicant(s) Mr. Parag Tripathi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Paras Kuhad, Sr. Adv. Mr. Rohan Shah, Adv. Mr. Srisabari Rajan, Adv. Mr. Abhinav Agrawal, Adv. Ms. Shally Bhasin, Adv. [AOR]
C.P.(C)Nos. 18201822/2017 etc. ... (contd.) 3 Mr. Dhruv Mehta, Sr. Adv. Mr. Rajesh KumarI, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Anant Gautam, Adv. Mr. Aakash Sehrawat, Adv. Mr. V. Govinda Ramanan, Adv. Mr. Anmol Mehta, Adv. Mr. Kunal Cheema, Adv. Mr. Apoorv Shukla, Adv. Mr. Nagendra Dube, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Mr. P.K. Dhakephalkar, learned senior counsel representing the Official Liquidator and the Court Receiver submits that in pursuance of the earlier order dated 19.04.2018, the contemnor has failed to pay the amount with regard to the movable properties and also failed to maintain the properties, as directed by this Court. At this juncture, Mr. Vikas Singh, learned senior counsel submitted that the respondent has not been given proper opportunity to maintain the movable property, as directed by this Court. We do not intend to decline the right to maintain the property which was conferred on him by the previous order. As far as the sale of movable properties is concerned, we have been apprised by the learned senior counsel appearing for the Official Liquidator and the Receiver that the highest value was Rs.6.47 crores. Mr. Vikas Singh has given a demand draft for a sum of Rs.7.5 crores to Mr. Venugopal. The said amount shall be deposited in the SEBI Sahara Account. Needless to say, the movable property shall be retained by the contemnor. Other persons who had given the predeposit for participating in the auction shall be refunded their amount.
C.P.(C)Nos. 18201822/2017 etc. ... (contd.) 4 As far as the auction of the properties is concerned, as directed by this Court on earlier occasion, the same shall continue as the contemnor has failed to deposit Rs.750 crores, as suggested by the contemnor. Let the matter be listed at 03:00 p.m. on 12.07.2018. (Subhash Chander) (Tapan Kumar Chakraborty) ARcumPS Court Master
CP 1820-22/17 1 ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CONMT.PET.(C) Nos.1820-1822/2017 in CONMT.PET.(C) No.413/2012 In C.A. No.9833/2011 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUBRATA ROY SAHARA AND ORS. & ORS. Respondent(s) (With appln.(s) for directions, extension of time of payment, impleadment and clarification/direction and intervention/ impleadment) WITH M.A. Nos.1364-1365/2017 in C.A. No.9813/2011 (XVII) (With appln.(s) for appropriate orders/directions) Date : 19-04-2018 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI Mr. Shekhar Naphade, Sr. Adv. (A.C.) Ms. Shubhangi Tuli, Adv. Mr. Vikram Sobti, Adv. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Purushottam Kumar Jha, Adv. Mr. Anuj Sarma, Adv. Ms. Niharika, Adv. Ms. Kanika Kalaiyarasan, Adv. M/s. K J John And Co. Mr. Darius Khambhatta, Sr. Adv. Mr. Rashmikant, Adv. Mr. Aniruddha P. Mayee, AOR Mr. Chirag Jain, Adv. Mr. Avnish M. Ola, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR
CP 1820-22/17 2 Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Ms. Deepika, Adv. Mr. Ahyush Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Tushar Gupta, Adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav, Adv. Mr. Devanshu Yadav, Adv. Ms. Mahima Deepak, Adv. Mr. Shyam Divan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Kunal Cheema, AOR Mr. Apoorv Shukla, Adv. Mr. Vishwajit Bhattacharya, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pawan Upadhyay, Adv. Mr. Sarvjit Pratap Singh, Adv. Mr. Shyam Divan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Anush Raajan V., Adv. Ms. Alya Khan, Adv. Ms. V. Lakshmi Menon, Adv. Mr. Vinod Kapoor, Adv. Mr. Manoj K. Mishra, Adv. Mr. Umesh Dubey, Adv. Mr. Sandeep Kumar Dwivedi, Adv. Mr. Mohan Parasharan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Vishnu Sharma, Adv. Ms. Anupama Sharma, Adv. Ms. Sonali Negi, Adv. Mr. Rana Mukherjee, Sr. Adv. Mr. D.L. Chidananda, Adv. Ms. Sadhana Sandhu, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar, Adv. Mr. M.K. Maroria, Adv. Mr. Parag P. Tripathi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Paras Kuhad, Sr. Adv. Mr. E.C. Agrawala, Adv. Mr. Mohan Babu Agarwal, Adv. Celeste Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Ramesh Babu MR, Adv. Ms. Manisha Singh, Adv. Ms. Swati Setia, Adv.
CP 1820-22/17 3 UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R In pursuance of our order dated 7 th February, 2018, two reports have been filed, one by the Official Liquidator and the other by the Court Receiver. Mr. Darius Khambhatta, learned senior counsel appearing for the Court Receiver and the Official Liquidator has filed a note of submissions. We have been apprised by Mr. Khambhatta that the architect has carved out five parcels of property in the Aamby Valley City. The valuation report has been submitted before the learned Company Judge, which has not yet been opened. An advertisement has been issued fixing the last date for submitting the bid 31 st May, 2018 and the auction is to be held on 2 nd June, 2018. Mr. Khambhatta would submit that the receipt of the bid commences on 21 st May and ends on 31 st May, 2018. Mr. Khambhatta further submitted that certain directions are required to be passed by this Court so that the statutory benefits which are available to all parcels of the lands and even in the entirety should be made applicable to all parcels of lands so that there will be no difficulty for sale of the lands. Another aspect which has been highlighted by Mr. Khambhatta is with regard to the maintenance of the lands, buildings and the villas. It is submitted by him that the Court Receiver is not able to collect the money and, therefore, this Court should direct the Court Receiver to collect the money from the lessees and villa owners on account of maintenance charges and other revenue generation dues. When we are proceeding with the matter in this
CP 1820-22/17 4 manner, Mr. Vikas Singh, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent-contemnor, submitted that the contemnor may be given one opportunity to sell portions of Aamby Valley properties. This kind of an offer had been made on a number of occasions and never remained fruitful, though such an offer was never made in respect of the Aamby Valley City project. On a query being made, Mr. Shekhar Naphade, learned senior counsel, who was appointed as Amicus Curiae to assist the Court, would submit that possibly it would be difficult to get out of Hill City Regulations and other statutory provisions and sale may take quite a long time. Therefore, there is no harm in giving one chance to the contemnor. Mr. Arvind P. Datar, learned senior counsel appearing for the SEBI also agrees for this course of action, with certain conditions. Mr. Vikas Singh has suggested that if the respondent-contemnor is allowed to sell certain lands and properties from any one parcel of the property, the contemnor may be able to fetch the money. He has also suggested that it can be done under the supervision of the learned Company Judge and Justice A.S. Oka. Mr. Singh also submitted that the respondent-contemnor may be allowed to carry out the maintenance and the maintenance and other charges can be collected by the Court Receiver only. On being asked, Mr. Khambhatta, learned senior counsel appearing for the Court Receiver, submitted that in all possibility, there will be no difficulty if certain lands and properties from any one particular parcel, as has been identified by the architect and put up on the website, are sold by the respondent-contemnor. We, accordingly, allow the contemnor to sell the portions of one particular parcel, which shall be chosen in consultation with the Architect,
CP 1820-22/17 5 the Official Liquidator and the Court Receiver. At the time of the sale, the Official Liquidator and the Court Receiver shall remain present and the money collected from the sale shall be deposited in the SEBI Sahara Refund Account. The learned Company Judge and Justice A.S. Oka shall also be apprised of the same. The sale permission, in the aforesaid manner, is given upto 15 th May, 2018. The amount realized from these sales shall be deposited forthwith in the SEBI Sahara Refund Account. Bids, pursuant to public notice for auction, are to be submitted between 21 st May and 31 st May, 2018. Depending on the outcome of the permission of sale given to the contemnor, further orders would be passed in this behalf. We make it clear that if the contemnor fails in attempt or is not able to realize substantial amounts from sale, the auction shall proceed as had been directed earlier. As far as the maintenance is concerned, the respondent-contemnor can start the maintenance and on commencement of maintenance, he can inform the Court Receiver and, thereafter, the Court Receiver can collect the amount from the property owners and pay it to the contemnor. We may hasten to add that when we say ‘maintenance’, it singularly means maintenance and it has nothing to do with any kind of revenue generation facet. As far as the movable properties are concerned, it is open to the respondent-contemnor to make an offer before the learned Company Judge, who shall make a decision in that regard. Let the matter be listed at 3.00 p.m. on 16 th May,
CP 1820-22/17 6 2018. (Chetan Kumar) (H.S. Parasher) Court Master Assistant Registrar
ITEM NO.822 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. Nos.48235 & 48224/29018 In CONMT.PET.(C) No.412 & 413/2012 & 260/2013 In C.A. No.9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 18-04-2018 This petition was MENTIONED today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKAR HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUD For Petitioner(s) Ms. Sujata Kurdukar, AOR Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR Mrs. Shally Bhasin, AOR M/s. K J John And Co. For Respondent(s) Mr. Vishnu Sharma, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R On mentioning, the matter is taken on Board. List the matter on 19 th April, 2018, before the appropriate Bench as per the roster. (Chetan Kumar) (H.S. Parasher) Court Master Assistant Registrar
ITEM NO.801 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. Nos. 50392/2018, 50393/2018 and 50405/2018 in CONMT.PET.(C) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9833/2011 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Petitioner VERSUS SUBRATA ROY SAHARA & ORS. Respondents Date : 17-04-2018 This matter was MENTIONED today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKAR HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUD For Petitioner Mr. Kunal Cheema, Adv. For Respondents UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R On mentioning, the matter is taken on Board. List the matter alongwith Contempt Petition (Civil) Nos. 1820-1822/2017 on 19.4.2018 before the appropriate Bench as per the roster. (Deepak Guglani) (H.S. Parasher) Court Master Assistant Registrar
ITEM NO.806 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A.No.54921 of 2018 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 16042018 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKAR HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUD For Petitioner(s) Ms. Sujata Kurdukar, AOR Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR Mrs. Shally Bhasin, AOR Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh, AOR M/S. K J John And Co, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. E.C. Agrawala, Adv. [AOR] [Mentioned on behalf of] M/S. K J John And Co, AOR Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Let the application be listed along with the main matter before appropriate Bench as per roster. (Subhash Chander) (H.S. Parasher) ARcumPS Assistant Registrar
ITEM NO.42 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. KAPIL MEHTA Civil Appeal No(s). 7152-7153/2016 SAHARA INDIA COMMERCIAL CORPORATION LIMITED Appellant(s) VERSUS SAHARA GRACE CONSUMER GRIEVANCES ASSOCIATION & ANR.Respondent(s) (Only C.A. No.7152-53 of 2016 is to be listed before the Ld.Registrar Court For FDR orders) Date : 09-04-2018 These appeals were called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Gautam Talukdar, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Anand Daga, Adv. Mr. Hardeep Singh Anand, Adv. Ms. Gunjan Ahuja, Adv. Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AOR Mr. Bharat Monga, Adv. Ms. Supriya Juneja, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R F.D.R. be renewed for a further period of 91 days from the due date of its maturity. KAPIL MEHTA Registrar 9.4.2018 rd
CP(C) 1820-1822/2017 1 ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CONMT.PET.(C) Nos.1820-1822/2017 In CONMT.PET.(C) Nos.412 and 413 of 2012 and 260 of 2013 In C.A. Nos.9813 and 9833 of 2011 and 8643 of 2012 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUBRATA ROY SAHARA AND ORS. & ORS. Respondent(s) WITH M.A. Nos.1364-1365/2017 In C.A. Nos.9813 AND 9833 OF 2011 I.A. No.88721/2017 In CONT.PET.(C) Nos.412 & 413 of 2012 & 260/2013 ) (With appln.(s) for appropriate directions) Date : 07-02-2018 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI Mr. Shekhar Napahade, Sr. Adv. (A.C.) Ms. Shubhangi Tuli, Adv. Mr. Vikram Sobti, Adv. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Anuj Sarma, Adv. Ms. Niharika, Adv. Mr. Aman Shukla, Adv. Ms. Kanika Kalaiyarasan, Adv. M/s. K J John And Co. For Respondent(s) Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Narender Huda, Sr. Adv. Mr. A.K. Gupta, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR
CP(C) 1820-1822/2017 2 Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Tushar Gupta, Adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Ms. Mahima Deepak, Adv. Mr. Vishnu Sharma, Adv. Ms. Deepika, Adv. Mr. Darius Khambatta, Sr. Adv. Mr. Rashmikant, Adv. Mr. Aniruddha P. Mayee, AOR Mr. Chirag Jain, Adv. Mr. Avnish Oza, Adv. Mr. Sunil Fernandes, Adv. Mr. Prakash Shinde, Adv. Ms. Astha Sharma, Adv. Mr. D.L. Chidananda, Adv. Ms. Sadhna Sandhu, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar, Adv. Mr. B.K. Prasad, Adv. Mr. M.K. Maroria, Adv. Mr. Ramesh Babu, Adv. Ms. Swati Setia, Adv. Mr. Saiby Jose Kidangoor, Adv. Mr. C.K. Sasi, Adv. Mr. Manukrishnan G., Adv. Ms. Sumi P.S., Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Mr. Darius Khambatta, learned senior counsel, appearing on behalf of the Official Liquidator and the Court Receiver, has submitted that despite best efforts, the entire Aamby Valley City is not in a position to be sold. Various difficulties have been pointed out in the Note given by the learned Company Judge. Learned counsel has also filed two status reports. We think it appropriate to reproduce the same. They read as follows:-
CP(C) 1820-1822/2017 3 “REPORT OF THE COURT RECEIVER 28TH DECEMBER 2017 ON THE ACTIONS ALREADY TAKEN AND THE FURTHER IMMEDIATE ACTIONS REQUIRED TO BE TAKEN FOR COMPLIANCE AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ORDER OF THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT DATED 23RD NOVEMBER 2017 AND COMPLIANCE/STATUS REPORT OF THE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR DATED 6TH FEBRUARY 2018 IN RELATION TO THE DIRECTIONS OF HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA VIDE ORDER DATED 12.10.2017 AND 23.11.2017: FURTHER ORDERS AND DIRECTIONS REQUIRED FROM THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ON THE ABOVE TWO REPORTS. Court Receiver (a) Symbolic possession taken by the Court Receiver, Bombay High Court, of the properties of Aamby Valley Limited on 11 th , 12 th , 13 th and 14 th December 2017 may be confirmed till further orders; (b) Court Receiver may be conferred with all the powers under Order XL, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, to deal with all situations and events prevailing and occuring in Aamby Valley City on an almost daily basis and/or in relation to its properties so that the actions already taken and/or proposed to be taken are not impeded or obstructed in any manner by any person; (c) Court Receiver may be permitted to take such actions as may be necessary for compliance of the orders and directions of this Hon’ble Court in relation to Aamby Valley City and the movable and immovable properties of which symbolic possession has been taken as aforesaid including appointment of the Aamby Valley Group of Companies or any of them or any other Agency as Agents of the Court Receiver on terms and conditions as may be fixed by the Court Receiver and for engaging and retaining services of existing professionals including Advocate(s)/Counsel(s)/ Agencies/Architect/Chartered Accountants/Engineers, etc. to maintain Aamby Valley City and to ensure that no encroachments take place, valuation does not reduce and auction/sale of Aamby Valley City takes place in a peaceful manner; (d) Respondents/Aamby Valley Limited may be directed to give the names of authorised persons to
CP(C) 1820-1822/2017 4 the Hon’ble Court with whom Official Liquidator/Court Receiver can deal for further transactions/ correspondence. Official Liquidator (e) Be pleased to permit the Official Liquidator to make lot(s) of the Aamby Valley City properties/ utilities/fragments/options/plots/amenities/ assets after demarcating and valuing the same with assistance of Special Experts including Valuers, Towner Planners and the like and for this purpose adopt modalities as may be approved by the Hon’ble Company Judge of the Bombay High Court acting in consultation with Hon’ble Mr. Justice A.S. Oka of the Bombay High Court; (f) Be pleased to permit the Official Liquidator to dispose by sale or such other arrangements the lots of properties/utilities/fragments/options/plots/ amenities /assets within the Aamby Valley City in one or more lot(s), jointly or separately or otherwise, in accordance with the modalities/fixation of the reserve price and/or terms by the Hon’ble Company Judge of the Bombay High Court acting in consultation with Hon’ble Mr. Justice A.S. Oka of the Bombay High Court; (g) To permit the Official Liquidator, Bombay High Court to sell/auction all or any of the movable assets which are lying in the Aamby Valley City inclusive of luxurious cars, Trucks, electronic goods, air-gliders etc., with the approval of and after getting its reserve price fixed by the Hon’ble Company Judge of the Bombay High Court acting in consultation with Hon’ble Mr. Justice A.S. Oka of the Bombay High Court. (h) To approve the action of Official Liquidator to take advice of Nitin Killawala & Associates, Architect and Town Planners on demarcation and valuation of various plots/utilities/properties/ fragments/options/assets within the Aamby Valley City; General (i) The Court Receiver, High Court, Bombay and/or Official Liquidator, High Court, Bombay be directed to obtain such further directions including modalities for enabling compliance the orders of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India from the Hon’ble
CP(C) 1820-1822/2017 5 Company Judge of the Bombay High Court acting in consultation with Hon’ble Mr. Justice A.S. Oka of the Bombay High Court; (j) The Respondents and/or the Aamby Valley Group of Companies or any one or more of them and all those in control, charge and management of the same be directed to duly comply without demur all directionhs as may be issued to them or any of them from time to time by the Court Receiver, High Court, Bombay, and/or the Official Liquidator, High Court, Bombay, with the approval of the Hon’ble Company Judge of the Bombay High Court acting in consultation with Hon’ble Mr. Justice A.S. Oka of the Bombay High Court, and for due compliance and implementation of all orders of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India; (k) To restrain any court/tribunal/authority, other than the Hon’ble Supreme Court, from passing any order/direction in respect of any actions/directions taken by the Court Receiver and/or the Official Liquidator pursuant to directions of the Hon’ble Company Judge of the Bombay High Court acting in consultation with Hon’ble Mr. Justice A.S. Oka of the Bombay High Court as appointed by this Hon’ble Court; (l) The petitioner SEBI be directed to remit/make available funds as may be requisitioned from time to time by the Court Receiver and/or the Official Liquidator with the approval of the Hon’ble Company Judge of the Bombay High Court acting in consultation with Hon’ble Mr. Justice A.S. Oka of the Bombay High Court; for the purpose of action/s taken, required to be taken for implementation of the orders and directions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India; and (m) To direct SEBI or the Ld. Amicus Curiae in the matter to assess the reasonability of the professional charges that may be paid to Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas (SAM) for the drafted terms and conditions of sale and the tender notice, which draft has the approval of Hon’ble Justice Shri B.N. Agrawal (Retd.);” The prayer which relates to selling of parcel of the properties is:- “(a) It will be easier to find buyers if Aamby Valley City is demarcated as plots/utilities/fragments and sell it in individual plots or as land parcels or
CP(C) 1820-1822/2017 6 amenities wise. For example, (a) the international school can be sold as it is with all the facilities attached to the school; (b) the golf course can be sold as it is with all the facilities attached to the golf course; (c) the convention hall, hotels and restaurants can be sold as it is with all the facilities attached thereto; (d) developed or undeveloped plots of land could be sold as parcels or plots of minimum indicated size; (e) aerodrome with its infrastructures; (f) water sports area can be separately sold, etc.” In addition to the aforesaid immovables properties, there is also a prayer for selling the movable properties. It is as under:- “In addition, there are also movables like 23 Mercedes Benz cars, about 224 other vehicles like buses and cars, innumerable two wheelers, air gliders, water sports vehicles, office furnitures, hundreds of TV sets, etc.” Keeping in view the reports of the Court Receiver, the Official Liquidator and the other prayers made in general, we are inclined to pass the following directions:- (i) The Official Liquidator, with the guidance of the Court Receiver and after obtaining appropriate directions from the learned Company Judge in consultation with Justice A.S. Oka, can go ahead to sell the movable properties and, thereafter, proceed to sell the immovable properties which find mention in paragraph (a) of the prayer clause. (ii) The amount spent by the Official Liquidator and the Court Receiver shall be reimbursed by the SEBI after getting approval from the learned Company Judge in consultation with
CP(C) 1820-1822/2017 7 Justice A.S. Oka and due intimation thereof shall be given to the contemnor. (iii) The symbolic possession of the properties of the Aamby Valley Limited taken by the Court Receiver, Bombay High Court from 11 th to 14 th December, 2017, stands confirmed. (iv) The Court Receiver is conferred with all the powers under the Code of Civil Procedure to deal with all the situations and events prevailing and occurring in Aamby Valley City on an almost daily basis and/or in relation to its properties so that the actions already taken and/or proposed to be taken are not impeded or obstructed in any manner by any person. (v) The Court Receiver is permitted to take such actions as may be necessary for compliance of the orders and directions passed by this Court in respect of movable and immovable properties situate in the Aamby Valley City and also appoint the Aamby Valley Group of Companies or any of them or any other agency as agents of the Court Receiver on terms and conditions to be determined by the Court Receiver. (vi) The Court Receiver is also authorized to engage and retain the services of existing professionals, including Advocates, Agencies, Architect, Chartered Accountants and Engineers to maintain Aamby Valley City and to ensure that no encroachments take place.
CP(C) 1820-1822/2017 8 (vii) It shall be the duty of the Court Receiver to see that the valuation of the properties does not reduce and the auction, as directed today, shall take place in a peaceful manner. The steps taken by the Court Receiver shall be put forth before the learned Company Judge, who shall take a decision in consultation with Justice A.S. Oka. (viii) As this Court is in seisin of the matter, no other court in the country shall entertain any litigation pertaining to Aamby Valley City. On a query being made, Mr. Khambatta, learned senior counsel, submitted that after due survey is made, the sale proceeding shall start and it may take approximately two months. In view of the aforesaid submission, let the matter be listed at 3.00 p.m. on 19 th April, 2018. The application filed by the contemnor, shall be considered on the next date of hearing. (Chetan Kumar) (H.S. Parasher) Court Master Assistant Registrar
ITEM NO.83 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. KAPIL MEHTA Civil Appeal No(s). 7152-7153/2016 SAHARA INDIA COMMERCIAL CORPORATION LIMITED Appellant(s) VERSUS SAHARA GRACE CONSUMER GRIEVANCES ASSOCIATION & ANR.Respondent(s) (Only C.A. No. 7224-25 of 2016 is to be listed before the Ld. Registrar Court.) Date : 04-01-2018 These appeals were called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Gautam Talukdar, AOR Mr. Harsh Vardhan, Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms. Gunjan Ahuja, Adv. Mr. Rohan Thawani, Adv. Ms. Vandana Sehgal, Adv. Mr. Hardeep Singh Anand, Adv. Mr. Zal Andhyarujina, Adv. Mr. Bharat Monga, Adv. Ms. Supriya Juneja, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R FDR to be renewed for a further period of 91 days from the due date of its maturity. KAPIL MEHTA Registrar 04.01.2018 PS
CP 412/2012 1 ITEM NO.302+303 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CONMT.PET.(C) Nos.1820-1822/2017 In CONMT.PET.(C) Nos.412 and 413/2012 In C.A. Nos.9813 and 9833/2011 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUBRATA ROY SAHARA & ORS. Respondent(s) With I.A. No.88721/2017 (With appln.(s) for appropriate orders/directions) WITH M.A. Nos.1364-1365/2017 in C.A. No.9813/2011 (With appln.(s) for appropriate orders/directions) Date : 23-11-2017 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI Mr. Shekhar Naphade, Sr. Adv. (A.C.) For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Purushottam Kumar Jha, Adv. Mr. Anuj Sarma, Adv. Ms. Niharika, Adv. Mr. Aman Shukla, Adv. Ms. Kanika Kalaiyarasan, Adv. M/s. K J John And Co. For Respondent(s) Mr. Mukul Rohatgi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Narendra Hooda, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav, Adv.
CP 412/2012 2 Mr. Shyam Divan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sunil Fernandes, Adv. Ms. Astha Sharma, Adv. Mr. Prakash Shinde, Adv. Mr. Jayanth Muthraj, Adv. Mr. Saiby Jose, Adv. Ms. Sumi P.S., Adv. Mr. C.K. Sasi, Adv. Mr. Ramesh Babu M.R., Adv. Ms. Swati Setia, Adv. Mr. D.L. Chidananda, Adv. Ms. Sadhna Sandhu, Adv. Mr. A.K. Shrivastava, Adv. Mr. B.K. Shrivastava, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar, Adv. Mr. M.K. Maroria, Adv. Mr. B.K. Prasad, Adv. Mr. Neeraj Kishan Kaul, Sr. Adv. Mr. Ashish Bhan, Adv. Ms. Padmaja Kaul, Adv. Ms. Richa Kaushal, Adv. Ms. Ananya Ghosh, Adv. Mr. Devanshu, Adv. Mr. Sanyat Lodha, Adv. Ms. Vijayalakshmi Menon, Adv. Ms. Vidhi goel, Adv. Mr. Vinod K., Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R On 12 th October, 2017, this Court had passed the following order:- “It is submitted by Mr. Arvind P. Datar, learned senior counsel being assisted by Mr. Pratap Venugopal, learned counsel appearing for the S.E.B.I. that because of the communication dated 28 th September, 2017 made by the respondent- contemnor, the holding of auction has not been fructified. Mr. Datar has taken us through the letter which has been sent by the respondent- contemnor to the Superintendent of Police, Pune Rural, Pune. The few paragraphs of the said communication need to be reproduced. They are:-
CP 412/2012 3 “Though in business, we have been truly following the spirit of a Pariwar, from our very beginning, in our establishment, in its true spirit, as like our parent Company – i.e. Sahara India Pariwar and have been striving hard during last few years to pay salary to all our karyakartas. Needless to mention, we have been making our all endeavours to ensure welfare of all our employees and workers with the available resources. However, the business revenue of the company has been constantly going down to an unbearable extent after the Hon'ble Supreme Court restrained all Sahara Group of Companies; vide its order dated 21 st November 2013, from parting with their movable and immovable properties. With this kind of restrictions imposed by the Hon'ble Apex Court, the real estate business of the Company has been badly affected (and we have not been able to fulfill our commitments with our esteemed customers) in all our area of business operation, with the result that not only the further sale has stopped but there has been no revenue generation from this business. Many commitments and bookings for Aamby Valley hospitality services, which have been a major source of revenue, have been cancelled in the past and many of them are being frequently cancelled. In the prevailing situation, even we are not sure as to whether we would be able to deliver our services to our esteemed customers, on due date, with respect to such bookings. Business to the extent of sustaining the Company is not forthcoming and is significantly low. On 19 th June, 2017, the Hon'ble Court directed the registry to place on record, the original terms and conditions of sale notice. Vide its order dated 5 th July, 2017, the Hon'ble Supreme Court allowed the terms and conditions of sale as also the draft
CP 412/2012 4 proclamation for the auction of Aamby Valley. The Hon'ble Supreme Court vide its order dated 25 th July, 2017 directed the Official Liquidator to take first two steps from the sale of Aamby Valley project and accordingly directed the Official Liquidator to publish the sale notice on 14 th August, 2017. The steps required to be taken for the publication of the sale notice was also allowed by the Hon'ble Court and the amount required for publication was directed to be released from SEBI-Sahara Account. Vide its order dated 11 th September, 2017, the Hon'ble Supreme Court further directed that the auction of the said property shall be held as per the schedule submitted by the Official Liquidator before the Court. The Official Liquidator was directed to carry out the auction, as per the procedure and during the auction the Registrar General of the High Court of Bombay – designated as Supreme Court appointee, was directed to remain personally present to oversee the physical auction at the auction venue at Mumbai. Since, Aamby Valley Ltd. And its subsidiaries/associates have the lone business of Real Estate and the Hospitality, which are both intrinsically related with the project of Aamby Valley and the subject property of Aamby Valley Project has already been put in the process of auction, it has become practically impossible for us to sustain business. There is no other financial resource available to take care of even the day to day expenses of business. In view of the above it is feared that, there is a strong possibility of deteriorating law and order situation in Aamby Valley City. Therefore, it is requested to take urgent and most suitable measures by deploying adequate Police Force at Aamby Valley City. We foresee threat and harm to human lives and destruction of property situated at Aamby Valley which is currently attached to the Hon'ble Supreme Court and hence requires adequate protection and security of this asset valued at Rs.One Lakh Crores by Knight Frank and Rs.Forty Three Thousand Crores by the Official Liquidator appointed by the
CP 412/2012 5 Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. It is also pertinent to adequately inform that,a boarding school by the name of International School Aamby (I.S.A.) has 70 no.of students, out of which many are from foreign lands such as U.S.A./Korea/Thailand/Bangaladesh and are resident student accommodated within the city of Aamby Valley City. Due to foreign nationality of students the subject gains international significance and importance. ” In our considered opinion, the respondent- contemnor could not have entered into correspondence with the Superintendent of Police when this Court had directed for auction of Aamby Valley. It is submitted by Mr. Datar that as a consequence of the communication, the police has taken custody of the property. If it is so, we direct the Director General of Police, Maharashtra, to see to it that the property is handed over to the Official Liquidator within forty-eight hours. The Official Liquidator shall proceed with the auction under the direct supervision of the Company Judge. That apart, the Official Liquidator shall also take guidance from Justice A.S. Oka, a sitting Judge of the Bombay High Court. The Company Judge and Justice A.S. Oka shall make joint endeavour so that the auction process which is to commence from a particular stage, shall continue and be over. If any impediment is created by anyone, he shall be liable for contempt of this Court and may be sent to jail. The concerned police shall render requisite assistance in the holding of auction as and when directed by the learned Company Judge in consultation with Justice A.S. Oka. List the matter at 3.00 p.m. on 23 rd November, 2017.” However, the matter was also mentioned on 14 th November, 2017 by Mr. Pratap Venugopal, learned counsel appearing for the SEBI.
CP 412/2012 6 In the course of hearing, Mr. Arvind P. Datar, learned senior counsel appearing for the SEBI has filed certain compliance/status report. The essence of the report is that the learned Judges of the High Court of Bombay intend to have certain directions from this Court to proceed with the auction. Having heard Mr. Arvind P. Datar, learned senior counsel along with Mr. Pratap Venugopal, learned counsel for the SEBI, Mr. Shekhar Naphade, learned senior counsel, who has been appointed as Amicus Curiae and Mr. Vinod Sharma, the Official Liquidator, we think it appropriate to state that the learned Judges of the High Court are at liberty to adopt the procedure which will facilitate the auction and the mode of auction as suggested by the Official Liquidator shall be considered by the learned Company Judge in consultation with Justice A.S. Oka. Additionally, as sought by Mr. Datar, a sum of Rs.84,00,000/- (Rupees eighty four lakhs only) be released in favour of the Official Liquidator so that he can do the needful required for publication/advertisement. If more expenses are required, the same can be requisitioned by the Bombay High Court from the SEBI-Sahara account. At this juncture, Mr. Shekhar Naphade submitted that there is possibility that the area in question is likely to be encroached. The same concern has been echoed by Mr. Datar and Mr. Venugopal. In view of the aforesaid, we appoint the Official Receiver of the Bombay High Court as Receiver in respect of the Ambey Valley city. The said arrangement shall remain in force till the auction is over. The duty of the Official Receiver is also to see that the property is properly
CP 412/2012 7 maintained and no encroachment takes place so that valuation does not reduce and auction takes place in peaceful manner. The Receiver is at liberty to take instructions from the learned Company Judge and Justice A.S. Oka, who are requested to work in harmony. If any coordination is necessary to be done, it may be done by the Official Liquidator with Mr. Pratap Venugopal, learned counsel who is assisting Mr. Arvind P. Datar, learned senior counsel for the SEBI. Let the matter be listed in the first week of February, 2018. (Chetan Kumar) (H.S. Parasher) Court Master Assistant Registrar
ITEM NO.806 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. Nos.29481/2017 & 88271/2017 In CONMT.PET.(C) No.412/2012 In C.A. No.9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN. LTD.& ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 14-11-2017 This matter was MENTIONED today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKAR HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUD For Petitioner(s) Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Ms. Niharika, Adv. Ms. Kanika, Adv. for M/S. K J John And Co. For Respondent(s) Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R On mentioning, the matter is taken on Board. List the applications on 23 rd November, 2017, before the appropriate Bench as per the roster. (Chetan Kumar) (H.S. Parasher) Court Master Assistant Registrar
CA 7152-53/16 1 ITEM NO.51 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Civil Appeal Nos.7152-7153/2016 SAHARA INDIA COMMERCIAL CORPORATION LIMITED Appellant(s) VERSUS SAHARA GRACE CONSUMER GRIEVANCES ASSOCIATION Respondent(s) & ANR. WITH C.A. Nos.9224-9225/2016 (XVII) Date : 13-11-2017 These appeals were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKAR HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUD For Appellant(s) Mr. C.U. Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Rohan Thawani, Adv. Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AOR Mr. Hardeep Singh Anand, Adv. Mr. Ajit Kumar Sinha, Sr. Adv. Mr. Rohan Ahuja, Adv. Ms. Sonali Dhir, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. C.U. Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Rohan Thawani, Adv. Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AOR Mr. Hardeep Singh Anand, Adv. Mr. Ajit Kumar Sinha, Sr. Adv. Mr. Rohan Ahuja, Adv. Ms. Sonali Dhir, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, AOR Mr. Suryakant Singla, Adv. Mr. Aditya Singla, Adv. Ms. Supriya Juneja, AOR
CA 7152-53/16 2 UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Admit. We have been apprised by Mr. Ajit Kumar Sinha, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner that approximately Rs.2.40 crores is still lying in deposit before the Registry of this Court. Out of thirty respondents, twenty-nine respondents have withdrawn Rs.4,00,000/- (Rupees four lakhs only) each. The left out respondent is entitled to withdraw the said amount. That apart, we direct that the respondents shall be entitled to withdraw Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakhs only) each, on proper identification. The rest of the amount shall be kept in a short term fixed deposit in the UCO Bank, Supreme Court Compound, New Delhi, so that interest can be accrued on the same. Let the matter be listed in the hearing List in the last week of February, 2018. (Chetan Kumar) (H.S. Parasher) Court Master Assistant Registrar
CP(C) 1820-1822/2017 1 ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CONMT.PET.(C) Nos.1820-1822/2017 In CONMT.PET.(C) No.412 & 413/2012 In C.A. Nos.9813 & 9833/2011 And C.P.(C) No.260/2013 in C.A. No.8643/2012 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SUBRATA ROY SAHARA & ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 12-10-2017 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI Mr. Shekhar Naphade, Sr. Adv. (A.C.) For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Purushottam K. Jha, Adv. Mr. Anuj Sarma, Adv. Ms. Niharika, Adv. for M/s. K J John And Co, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Mukul Rohatgi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Narendra Hooda, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Vijay, Adv. Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R It is submitted by Mr. Arvind P. Datar, learned senior counsel being assisted by Mr. Pratap Venugopal, learned counsel appearing for the S.E.B.I. that because of
CP(C) 1820-1822/2017 2 the communication dated 28 th September, 2017 made by the respondent-contemnor, the holding of auction has not been fructified. Mr. Datar has taken us through the letter which has been sent by the respondent-contemnor to the Superintendent of Police, Pune Rural, Pune. The few paragraphs of the said communication need to be reproduced. They are:- “Though in business, we have been truly following the spirit of a Pariwar, from our very beginning, in our establishment, in its true spirit, as like our parent Company – i.e. Sahara India Pariwar and have been striving hard during last few years to pay salary to all our karyakartas. Needless to mention, we have been making our all endeavours to ensure welfare of all our employees and workers with the available resources. However, the business revenue of the company has been constantly going down to an unbearable extent after the Hon'ble Supreme Court restrained all Sahara Group of Companies; vide its order dated 21 st November 2013, from parting with their movable and immovable properties. With this kind of restrictions imposed by the Hon'ble Apex Court, the real estate business of the Company has been badly affected (and we have not been able to fulfill our commitments with our esteemed customers) in all our area of business operation, with the result that not only the further sale has stopped but there has been no revenue generation from this business. Many commitments and bookings for Aamby Valley hospitality services, which have been a major source of revenue, have been cancelled in the past and many of them are being frequently cancelled. In the prevailing situation, even we are not sure as to whether we would be able to deliver our services to our esteemed customers, on due date, with respect to such bookings. Business to the extent of sustaining the Company is not forthcoming and is significantly low. On 19 th June, 2017, the Hon'ble Court directed the registry to place on record, the original terms and conditions of sale notice. Vide its
CP(C) 1820-1822/2017 3 order dated 5 th July, 2017, the Hon'ble Supreme Court allowed the terms and conditions of sale as also the draft proclamation for the auction of Aamby Valley. The Hon'ble Supreme Court vide its order dated 25 th July, 2017 directed the Official Liquidator to take first two steps from the sale of Aamby Valley project and accordingly directed the Official Liquidator to publish the sale notice on 14 th August, 2017. The steps required to be taken for the publication of the sale notice was also allowed by the Hon'ble Court and the amount required for publication was directed to be released from SEBI-Sahara Account. Vide its order dated 11 th September, 2017, the Hon'ble Supreme Court further directed that the auction of the said property shall be held as per the schedule submitted by the Official Liquidator before the Court. The Official Liquidator was directed to carry out the auction, as per the procedure and during the auction the Registrar General of the High Court of Bombay – designated as Supreme Court appointee, was directed to remain personally present to oversee the physical auction at the auction venue at Mumbai. Since, Aamby Valley Ltd. And its subsidiaries/associates have the lone business of Real Estate and the Hospitality, which are both intrinsically related with the project of Aamby Valley and the subject property of Aamby Valley Project has already been put in the process of auction, it has become practically impossible for us to sustain business. There is no other financial resource available to take care of even the day to day expenses of business. In view of the above it is feared that, there is a strong possibility of deteriorating law and order situation in Aamby Valley City. Therefore, it is requested to take urgent and most suitable measures by deploying adequate Police Force at Aamby Valley City. We foresee threat and harm to human lives and destruction of property situated at Aamby Valley which is currently attached to the Hon'ble Supreme Court and hence requires adequate protection and security of this asset valued at Rs.One Lakh Crores by Knight Frank and Rs.Forty Three Thousand Crores by the Official Liquidator appointed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India.
CP(C) 1820-1822/2017 4 It is also pertinent to adequately inform that,a boarding school by the name of International School Aamby (I.S.A.) has 70 no.of students, out of which many are from foreign lands such as U.S.A./Korea/Thailand/Bangaladesh and are resident student accommodated within the city of Aamby Valley City. Due to foreign nationality of students the subject gains international significance and importance. ” In our considered opinion, the respondent-contemnor could not have entered into correspondence with the Superintendent of Police when this Court had directed for auction of Aamby Valley. It is submitted by Mr. Datar that as a consequence of the communication, the police has taken custody of the property. If it is so, we direct the Director General of Police, Maharashtra, to see to it that the property is handed over to the Official Liquidator within forty-eight hours. The Official Liquidator shall proceed with the auction under the direct supervision of the Company Judge. That apart, the Official Liquidator shall also take guidance from Justice A.S. Oka, a sitting Judge of the Bombay High Court. The Company Judge and Justice A.S. Oka shall make joint endeavour so that the auction process which is to commence from a particular stage, shall continue and be over. If any impediment is created by anyone, he shall be liable for contempt of this Court and may be sent to jail. The concerned police shall render requisite assistance in the holding of auction as and when directed by the learned Company Judge in consultation with Justice A.S. Oka. List the matter at 3.00 p.m. on 23 rd November, 2017. (Chetan Kumar) (H.S. Parasher) Court Master Assistant Registrar
CP 412/2012 1 ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. Nos.83-85/2015,104-106/2015, 131/2015, 158-160/2016, 180-182/2016, 190-191/2016, 194-195/2016, 205-207/2016, 208/2016, 209-210/2016, 211/2016,212-214/2016, 218-220/2016, 227/2016,231/2016, 232/2016, 239/2016, 240/2016, 241/2016, 242/2016, 243/2016 & 244-246/2016, 247/2017, 251-252, 253-255, 256, 257-259, 260-262/2017, 268-270/2017, 273-274/2017, 280-282/2017, 284-286/2017, 47133 & 47681/2017 In CONMT.PET.(C) Nos.412 & 413/2012 In C.A. Nos.9813 & 9833/2011 And C.P.(C) No.260/2013 in C.A. No.8643/2012 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPORATION LTD. Respondent(s) & ORS. (Appln.(s) for intervention, clarification/direction, permission to place on record subsequent facts and for appropriate orders/directions) Date: 11/09/2017 These applications were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI Mr. Shekhar Napahade, Sr. Adv. (A.C.) For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Purushottam Kumar Jha, Adv. Mr. Anuj Sarma, Adv. Ms. Niharika, Adv.
CP 412/2012 2 Mr. Aman Shukla, Adv. for M/s. K. J. John & Co. For Respondent(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Mr. Narender Hooda, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR Mr. Arohi Bhalla, Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Nizam Pasha, Adv. Mr. Tushar Gupta, Adv. Mr. Simaranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv. Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Ms. Neha Gupta, Adv. Mr. Sarthak Nayak, Adv. Mr. Aviral Dhirendra, Adv. Mr. Prashant Kumar, AOR Mr. Ramesh Babu M. R., AOR Ms. Swati Setia, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar, AOR Mr. Rakesh Kr. Sharma, AOR Mr. Amit Anand Tiwari, AOR Mr. Yash Pal Dhingra, AOR Mr. P.N. Puri, AOR Mr. Biswajeet Bhattachary, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pawan Upadhyay, Adv. Mr. Akash Tyagi, Adv. Ms. Sharmila Upadhyay, AOR Mr. C.K. Sasi, AOR Mr. G. Sivabalamurugan, AOR Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AOR Mr. Tushar Mehta, ASG Mr. Rana Mukherjee, Sr. Adv. Mr. D.L. Chidananda, Adv. Ms. Sadhana Sandhu, Adv. Mr. M.K. Maroria, Adv.
CP 412/2012 3 Mr. B.K. Prasad, AOR Mr. A.K. Srivastava, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar, AOR Mr. Ankur S. Kulkarni, AOR Mr. Anupam Lal Das, AOR Mr. Prashant Choudhary, AOR Mr. Sanjeev Agarwal, AOR Mr. Mohit D. Ram, AOR Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh, AOR Mrs. Shally Bhasin, AOR Mr. Sunil Fernandes, AOR Ms. Astha Sharma, Adv. Ms. Nupur Kumar, Adv. Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Yunus Malik, Adv. Mr. Anis Maheshwari, Adv. Mr. Zain Khan, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Contempt Petition (C) No.412/2012 The present proceedings for contempt have a chequered history, but unfortunately like some litigation which have the chequered history due to no fault of the parties but because of circumstances, the present proceedings have such a history which is, if we permit ourselves to say so, the ingenious brain child of the respondent-contemnor. Many an order came to be passed in the contempt proceedings due to the recalcitrant proclivity of the respondent-contemnor who possibly has harboured an adroit idea that he can test the patience of this Court. It has been said long back that the patience itself has its own patience and is not without limitations. The purpose of
CP 412/2012 4 saying so relates to liberty granted on number of occasions to the respondent-contemnor, Mr. Subrata Roy, to pay the amount by depositing the same in SEBI-Sahara account. Except hyperbolic arguments and rhetoric statements, the amount in entirety has not been paid. Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent-contemnor would submit with all the vehemence as well as humility at his command, that it is the first case where a contemnor has paid the substantial amount which may go up to Rs.16,000 crores, and though approximately Rs.8651 crores is due, that should not be held against him. The submission on a first blush may look attractive, but the proceeding that has been recorded by this Court from time to time will compel one to repel the submission and extinguish the impression gathered on the first blush. Having said this, we intend to sit on a time machine, but not for long. Suffice it to refer to some orders which we have passed in the recent past. On 27 th April, 2017, this Court, taking note of order dated 17 th April, 2017, had passed the following order:- “At this juncture, Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel submitted that the petitioner may be granted liberty to send Rs.1500,00,00,000/- (Rupees one thousand five hundred crores only) in the accounts of SEBI Sahara Refund Account through RTGS on or before 15.6.2017. Mr. Arvind Datar, learned senior counsel appearing for the SEBI submitted that he has no objection. If the amount comes to the account by electronic transaction, SEBI shall return the cheque amounting to Rs.1500,00,00,000/- (Rupees one thousand five hundred crore only). “Regard being had to the submissions of the official liquidator and the affidavit that has been filed by the contemnor, we direct that the reserved price for the purpose of auction be
CP 412/2012 5 fixed at Rs.37,392 Crores. The Official Liquidator shall proceed in accordance with the Rules of procedure and prepare a draft terms and conditions and sale notice and the same shall be filed for our approval on 19.6.2017. The terms and conditions for the auction shall be finalised by Mr. Vinod Sharma, the Official Liquidator in consultation with Mr. Justice B.N. Agarwal, formerly a Judge of this Court. The official liquidator will be at liberty to avail the expertise of an expert for drafting the terms and conditions. The official liquidator shall remain personally present with his team, on the next date of hearing. List the matter at 10.30 a.m. on 19.6.2017. Be it clarified that the matter is directed to e listed on that day to scrutinise the action/steps taken in pursuance of the order passed today. We may hasten to add that on the basis of this order, the Court assembled in summer vacation and as the matter was required to be verified only for the limited purpose, the two-Judge Bench combination met. On 19 th June, 2017, the Court dealt with I.A. No.47681 of 2017, which was filed seeking extension of 10 working days for complying with the undertaking dated 27 th April, 2017, and further to permit the respondent-contemnor for sale of Grosvenor House Hotel, i.e. by transfer of shares of the company to the buyer and to enter into the agreement for refinancing facility in respect of the Plaza Hotel and the Dreams Downtown Hotel, New York. That apart, further reliefs were sought to sell the lands at the price less than 90% of the circle rate, since that was the permissible rate fixed by this Court and to accept the properties of Saharas as security for the balance principal amount instead of cash deposit.
CP 412/2012 6 It is interesting to note that a prayer was made to vacate the order dated 21 st November, 2013, lifting the embargoes on the Sahara Group of Companies so that Saharas can raise money out of their assets and run, promote their businesses in the interest of justice, equity and fair play. After noting the prayers, the Court proceeded to pass the following order:- “Be it noted, on the previous occasion, i.e. 27 th April, 2017, the contemnor had furnished two post-dated cheques, one dated 15 th June, 2017, for Rs.1500,00,00,000/- (Rupees fifteen hundred crores only) and the second one dated 15 th July, 2017, for a sum of Rs.552,21,00,000/- (Rupees five hundred fifty-two crores and twenty-one lakhs only). An assurance was given by Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner, as well as by the contemnor, who was present in the Court, that the cheques shall be honoured. It was directed that if there will be a failure, the contemnor may be sent to custody. It is submitted by Mr. Sibal relying on the application filed by the contemnor that till today they have deposited Rs.774 crores in SEBI Sahara Refund Account and today he has handed over eighteen demand drafts amounting to Rs.16,11,95,000/- (Rupees sixteen crores eleven lakhs and ninety-five thousand) in favour of SEBI Sahara Refund Account. The total amount that has been deposited in SEBI Sahara Refund Account comes to Rs.790.18 crores. Thus, the balance sum to be paid is Rs.709.82 crores. At this juncture, it is submitted by Mr. Sibal, learned senior counsel that there is a property situate in villages Bahadrabad and Ranipur, Haridwar in the State of Uttarakhand, admeasuring 87.03 acres and he has arranged a buyer, who is prepared to purchase the said property for Rs.109.75 crores. The said amount is 62% of the circle rate and, thereby, less than 38% of the circle rate. Permission is sought to sell the property at that rate. As advised at present, we are not inclined to grant the said permission. We think that the said property shall be put to public auction by S.E.B.I with the assistance of approved agency.
CP 412/2012 7 In the bid, S.E.B.I. can mention 90% of the circle rate, as some time this Court had permitted at that rate. The auction shall be conducted by the competent authority of S.E.B.I. through the approved agency on or before 5 th July, 2017. Needless to say, e-auction can be done in respect of this property. As the contemnor has deposited Rs.790.18 crores, we are inclined to extend the time by ten working days so that the undertaking can be complied with. The balance amount i.e. Rs.709.82 crores shall be deposited with the SEBI Sahara Refund Account by 4 th July, 2017. The prayer No.(ii) in the interlocutory application relates to grant of permission for sale of Grosvenor House Hotel, i.e. by transfer of shares of the company to the buyer i.e. GH Equity U.K. Limited. Mr. Arvind P. Datar, learned senior counsel appearing for the S.E.B.I. has no objection if such permission is granted. The permission is, accordingly, granted. On that day, the matter stood adjourned to 5 th July, 2017 and on the adjourned date, after taking note of 19 th June, 2017 order, a submission was advanced by the learned senior counsel for the respondent-contemnor that a sum of Rs.710.22 crores has already been deposited in SEBI-Sahara account and thereby the commitment given on 19 th June, 2017, as regards the first cheque stood satisfied. A prayer was made for grant of time till 15 th August, 2017, for encashment of the cheque amounting to Rs.552.21 crores. The Court on that day, expressing its disinclination, passed the following order:- “At that juncture, keeping in view the progress with regard to the report of the official liquidator, the Court observed as under :- “It is necessary to note that we had directed the Official Liquidator of the High Court of Bombay to proceed with the
CP 412/2012 8 drafting of terms and conditions of sale notice for the Amby Valley property. Mr. Vinod Sharma, Official Liquidator submits that the terms and conditions have been scrutinized by Justice B.N. Agarwal, formerly a Judge of this Court, who has been nominated to supervise the refund process. A copy of the terms and conditions be handed over to the learned counsel for the contemnor. The original terms and conditions of the sale notice which have been filed in the Court be taken on record. Be it stated, the said documents have been filed with the report of the Official Liquidator being O.L.R. No.122 of 2017. The prayer for approval of the terms and conditions of sale notice shall be considered on the next date of hearing.” In view of the aforesaid, we are absolutely disinclined to entertain the prayer for extension of time for encashing the cheque amount for Rs.552.21 crores dated 15.7.2017. SEBI is directed to produce the cheque in the concerned bank in the relevant account. If the cheque is dishonoured, appropriate consequences shall be faced by the contemnor. At this stage, we think it appropriate to accept the terms and conditions and the draft proclamation for the auction of Ambey Vally. Further steps for acution shall be taken if the cheque is not honoured. At this juncture, it is submitted by Mr. Datar, learned senior counsel appearing for the SEBI that the property situated at Haridwar may require four more weeks to be auctioned as some portions are encumbered. Needless to say, the auction shall take place in respect of the unencumbered part of the Haridwar property and the same shall be adjusted not towards the cheque amount but towards the balance amount. We may hasten to add that though we have approved the terms and conditions and the draft proclamation, we have not directed for auction today as the date of the cheque is 15.7.2017 and if the cheque is honoured, we shall direct for deposit of bigger amount so that the sum due, which is approximately nine thousand crores as on today, shall be expressly realized, for realization is of the money is
CP 412/2012 9 the principal purpose of the present proceedings.” On 25 th July, 2017, the Court referred to the order dated 5 th July, 2017, and, thereafter noted that the respondent-contemnor had deposited a sum of Rs.247 crores and a submission was advanced that the balance amount i.e. Rs.305.21 crores shall be deposited by 12 th August, 2017. Mr. Pratap Venugoal, learned counsel appearing for SEBI had raised serious objection to the same. Thereafter, the Court observed thus:- “At this Stage, Mr. Sibal earnestly urged that when the property has been attached and the valuation of the same is more than Rs.34,000 crores, this Court should grant time to deposit the amount and the reasonable time would be 18 months. Whether 18 month is reasonable or lesser time than that has to be debated. The issue, as presently perceived, is the bona fides of the respondent-contemnor and that can be spelt out or translated by action and the action is deposit of the dues in SEBI-Sahara account. Having heard learned counsel for the parties at length, it is directed that the respondent-contemnor shall deposit Rs.1500 crores (Rupees fifteen hundred crores only) which would include the balance amount of Rs.305.21 Crores by 7.9.2017. After due consideration, we have granted time till 7.9.2017, though Mr. Sibal, with all humility at his command, prayed for fixing the date some time in October, 2017. Though we appreciate the humble submission but we are not in a position to accede to the same. The grant of time, without any steps taken by the Court, would tantamount to giving indulgence. Indulgence has the propensity to give rise to procrastination which is the murderer of justice. Therefore, we are disposed to think that the first two steps for sale of Ambey Vally Project shall be undertaken within this time and for the same we approve the draft sale notice submitted by the Official Liquidator and direct him that he shall take first two steps
CP 412/2012 10 by updating the dates. The official liquidator shall publish the sale notice as given by him and the notice shall be published on 14.8.2017. The steps which are required to be taken for the publication of the sale notice are allowed. The amount that is required for publication shall be given from the SEBI Sahara Account. Mr. Pratap Venugopal shall see that the moment the official liquidator produce a letter, the amount shall be released to the official liquidator.” At this juncture, it is essential to state that some imposters came in the proceedings and wanted to pay the amount. As they could not, the representative of the said ambitious imposters were sent to custody. On 10 th August, 2017, an application was filed with the following prayers:- “(i) Allow Sahara Group Company, namely, Aamby Valley Ltd., to enter into the agreement with M/s. Royal Partners Investment Fund Ltd., for investment of US$ 1.67 Billion; (ii) Stop the auction and lift the attachment on the Aamby Valley City; and (iii) pass such further orders as may be deemed just, necessary and appropriate, in the facts and circumstances of the case.” The Court opined that it was not inclined to entertain the prayers made in the interlocutory application. However, it was observed that if the contemnor enter into any negotiations and deposits the amount before this Court, appropriate order shall be passed on the next date of hearing. Be it noted, the said interlocutory application was taken up upon being mentioned before this Court.
CP 412/2012 11 At this juncture, it is apposite to state that the matter was adjourned to 11 th September, 2017, as per the order passed on the earlier occasion, that is, 25 th July, 2017, and the respondent-contemnor was required to deposit Rs.1500 crores which would include the balance amount of Rs.305.21 crores. On that day itself, the Court had directed the Official Liquidator to take first two steps for sale of Ambey Valley project. Today, when the matter was taken up, Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent-contemnor filed a chart as to how the respondent-contemnor intends to comply with the order dated 25 th July, 2017. We think it seemly to reproduce the said chart:- “ S.No. Date Particulars Amount 1. July to September By RTGS/NEFT/DDs against Porbandar and Pune Property Rs.23.20 Crores 2. 11.09.2017 By 10 Demand Drafts against Madurai Property Rs.10.00 Crores 3. 11.09.2017 By 5 Demand Drafts against Mortgage Loan Rs.500.00 Crores 4. 11.11.2017 By Post Dated Cheques Rs.966.80 Crores Total (Rs.FIFTEEN HUNDRED CRORES ONLY) Rs.1500.00 Crores “ Mr. Sibal would urge that tremendous efforts have been made by the respondent-contemnor to comply with the order of this Court and if the prayer made by him is not accepted, the principle of reasonableness would be defeated. That apart, he would submit that the Official Liquidator has
CP 412/2012 12 only been able to get two KYC forms from the prospective bidders. Mr. Arvind P. Datar, learned senior counsel along with Mr. Pratap Venugopal, learned counsel appearing for the SEBI would contend that the auction has to proceed and this kind of “drama of procrastination” must stop. On being asked, Mr. Shekhar Naphade, learned Amicus Curiae appointed in the case echoing the same argument advanced by Mr. Datar urged that the conception “enough is enough” should be adopted by this Court and there is no reason why long rope should be given to the respondent-contemnor to play truancy and seek indulgence. At this juncture, we may state that the Official Liquidator has given a list of important dates with regard to the proceeding of the auction. The said chart read as under:- “ Step No. Action Dates 1. Publication in newspapers August 14, 2017 2. KYC Forms to be submitted by Prospective bidders August 29 – September 09, 2017 3. Information of property will be accessible by the qualified intending bidder September 11–September 20, 2017 4. Physical Inspection of properties to intending bidder September 19 - September 20, 2017 5. Bids to be received in sealed September 21 - October 03, 2017
CP 412/2012 13 cover by the Official Liquidator along with 15% EMD vide NEFT/RTGS 6. Auction Sale at Auction venue as directed by this Hon'ble Court October 10 - October 11, 2017 7. Intimation to highest three Intending bidders vide email. Other EMDs to be refunded October 17, 2017 8. Successful Bidder to make payment of 50% of the Purchase Price to the designated bank account October 17 - November 16, 2017 9. Successful Bidder to make payment of 25% of the Purchase Price to the designated bank account November 17 - December 16, 2017 10. Successful Bidder to make balance payment of 25% of the Purchase Price to the designated bank account December 17 - January 16, 2018 11. Apex Court to confirm the sale/lease in favour of Purchaser and deliver possession to the Purchaser. The EMDs of other two highest Intending bidders to be refunded with interest As directed by this Hon'ble Court. 12. Deed of Conveyance /lease to be 6 months from date of confirmation of sale
CP 412/2012 14 executed in favour of the Purchaser(s) 13. In event of failure of successful bidder to pay the entire consideration, to resell the property to the other highest intending bidder in chronological order and complete the sale as per above process. 90 days from date of failure of successful bidder to make the payments. After hearing the counsel for the parties, we told in the open Court that we will be passing the order in the course of day. At that point of time, Mr. Datar has submitted that there are certain prayers made by the Official Liquidator relating to the auction. The said prayers read as follows:- “Appointment of a 'Designated Supreme Court Appointee' to oversee the physical auction on the spot at the Auction Venue. Permit the Official Liquidator to conduct the Auction at Aamby Valley City, Lonavala Pune or at Hall/Auditorium in Mumbai against payment of rent. Pass a Vesting order allowing the relaxation(s)/vesting as mentioned in paragraph 10 of OLR No.122 of 2017. Direct the Owner(s) of the Properties/Aamby Valley Limited/subsidiaries and associate companies of Aamby Valley Limited/individual nominees/employees of Aamby Valley Limited/any other person in possession of the Properties (as may be applicable) to handover vacant,
CP 412/2012 15 unencumbered and peaceful possession of the Properties to the Purchaser(s) and other formalities of transfer of title etc. as mentioned in paragraph 11 of OLR No.122 of 2017. Direct the authorities or their representatives as mentioned in paragraph 13 of OLR No.122 of 2017 to remain present at the auction venue during the auction proceedings and finalization of bidding(s).” Mr. Shekhar Naphade, learned Amicus Curiae would suggest that if this Court is thinking of auction, it should be held in Mumbai. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we are of the convinced opinion that grant of further time to the respondent-contemnor and entertaining post-dated cheques which are dated 11 th November, 2017, would tantamount to travesty of justice and extending unwarranted sympathy to a person who is indubitably an abuser of the process of law. He, who thinks or for that matter harbours the notion that he can play with law, is under wrong impression. To quote a phrase from Chief Justice Marshal, 'it is not a laboratory where children come to play'. We are constrained to state that the respondent-contemnor in his own way has treated this Court as a laboratory and has made a maladroit effort to play, possibly thinking that he can survive on the ventilator as long as he can. He would have been well advised that a person who goes on a ventilator may not survive for long and, in any case, a time would come when he has to be comatosed. Here comatose takes place as regards the ambitious effort made by the respondent-contemnor. Therefore, we direct without any hesitation that the auction shall be held as per the direction given by this Court and the Official Liquidator is permitted to carry out the auction as per procedure and during the auction the Registrar General of the High Court of
CP 412/2012 16 Bombay, who is designated as Supreme Court appointee, shall remain personally present to over see the physical auction at the auction venue at Mumbai. After the auction is held, liberty is granted to the counsel for the parties to mention. The interim order passed on the earlier occasion as regards to the respondent-contemnor shall remain in force. (Chetan Kumar) (Shakti Parkash Sharma) Court Master Assistant Registrar
CP(C) 412/2012 1 ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. No.70168 of 2017 In CONMT.PET.(C) Nos.412 & 413/2012 In C.A. Nos.9813 & 9833/2011 And C.P.(C) No.260/2013 in C.A. No.8643/2012 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN. LTD. & ORS. Respondent(s) (With appln.(s) for appropriate orders/directions) Date : 10-08-2017 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI Mr. Shekhar Naphade, Sr. Adv. (A.C.) Ms. Shubhangi Tuli, Adv. Mr. Vikram Sobti, Adv. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Anuj Sarma, Adv. Ms. Niharika, Adv. Mr. Aman Shukla, Adv. for M/s. K J John And Co. Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh, AOR For Respondent(s)/ Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Applicant(s) Mr. Salman Khurshid, Sr. Adv. Mr. Narendra Hooda, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Tushar Gupta, Adv.
CP(C) 412/2012 2 Mr. Nizam Pasha, Adv. Mr. Simaranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv. Mr. Zafar Khurshid, Adv. Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Ms. Neha Gupta, Adv. Ms. Geetanjali Kapur, Adv. Ms. Sakshi Kotiyal, Adv. Mr. Maninder Singh, ASG Mr. Tushar Mehta, ASG Mr. Rana Mukherjee, Sr. Adv. Mr. D.L. Chidananda, Adv. Ms. Sadhna Sandhu, Adv. Mr. A.K. Srivastava, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar, Adv. Mr. B.K. Prasad, Adv. Mr. M.K. Maroria, Adv. Mr. Mukul Rohatgi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Nikhil Jain, Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Prashant Kumar, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R This is an application for the following prayers:- (i) Allow Sahara Group Company, namely, Aamby Valley Ltd., to enter into the agreement with M/s. Royal Partners Investment Fund Ltd., for investment of US$ 1.67 Billion; (ii) Stop the auction and lift the attachment on the Aamby Valley City; and (iii) pass such further orders as may be deemed just, necessary and appropriate, in the facts and circumstances of the case. Having heard Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel for the contemnor-applicant and Mr. Arvind P. Datar, learned senior counsel for the S.E.B.I., we are not inclined to entertain the prayers made in the interlocutory application. However, if the applicant enters into any negotiations and
CP(C) 412/2012 3 deposits the amount before this Court, appropriate order shall be passed on the next date of hearing. The interlocutory application is, accordingly, disposed of. Call the main matter on the date fixed. The contemnor shall remain personally present on the next date of hearing. (Chetan Kumar) (H.S. Parasher) Court Master Assistant Registrar
ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IA 83/2015, 104/2015, 1/2015, 131/2015, 158/2016, 180/2016, 190/2016, 194/2016,205/2016,208/2016,209/2016,211/2016,218/2016, 227/2016, 231/2016, 232/2016, 239/2016, 240/2016, 241/2016, 256/2017, 257/2017, 260/2017, 268/2017, 273/2017, 280/2017, 284/2017, 39847/2017, 47133/2017, 47681/2017, 49580/2017 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (ONLY I.A.NOS.83-85/2015, 104-106/2015, 131/2015, 158-160/2016, 180-182/2016, 190-191/2016, 194-195/2016, 205-207/2016, 208/2016, 209-210/2016, 211/2016, 212-214/2016, 218-220/2016, 227/2016, 231/2016, 232/2016, 239/2016, 240/2016, 241/2016, 242/2016, 243/2016, 244-246/2016, 247/2017, 251-252, 253-255, 256, 257-259, 260-260/2017, 268-270/2017, 273-274/2017, 280-282/2017, 284-286/2017, 47133, 47681/2017 In CONMT.PET.(C) Nos. 412, 413/2012 In C.A. Nos. 9813 , 9833/2011 and C.P. (C) No. 260/2013 in C.A. No. 8643/2012 and IA No.60598/2017-EXTENSION OF TIME) Date : 25-07-2017 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI Mr. Shekhar Napahade, Sr. Adv. (A.C.) Ms. Shubhangi Tuli, Adv. Mr. Vikram Sobti, Adv. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Anuj Kumar Sarma, Adv. Ms. Niharika, Adv. Ms. Kanika Kalaiyarasan, Adv. Mr. Aman Shukla, Adv. for M/s. K. J. John & Co. For Respondent(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Mr. Salman Khurshid, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR
2 Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Tushar Gupta, Adv. Mr. Nizam Pasha, Adv. Mr. Simaranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv. Mr. Zafar Khurshid, Adv. Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Ms. Neha Gupta, Adv. Ms. Geetanjali Kapur, Adv. Ms. Sakshi Kotiyal, Adv. Mr. Mukul Rohtagi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Jain, Adv. Ms. Devanshi Singh, Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Tushar Gupta, Adv. Mr. Ashish Maheshwari, Adv. Mr. Zain Khan, Adv. Mr. Prashant Kumar, AOR Ms. Aarohi Bhalla, Adv. Mr. Ramesh Babu M. R., AOR Ms. Swati Setia, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar, AOR Mr. Rakesh Kr. Sharma, AOR Mr. Amit Anand Tiwari, AOR Mr. Yash Pal Dhingra, AOR Mr. P.N. Puri, AOR Mr. Vishwajeet Bhattacharya, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pawan Upadhyay, Adv. Mr. Sarvjit Pratap Singh, Adv. Mr. Akash Tyagi, Adv. Mr. Ratik Sharma, Adv. Ms. Sharmila Upadhyay, AOR Mr. Saiby Jose Kidangoor, Adv. Mr. C.K. Sasi, AOR Mr. G. Sivabalamurugan, AOR Ms. Vandana, Adv. Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AOR Mr. Rana Mukherjee, Sr. Adv.
3 Mr. D.L. Chidananda, Adv. Ms. Sadhna Sandhu, Adv. Mr. A.K. Srivastav, Adv. Ms. Sushma Manchanda, Adv. Mr. Nalin Kohli, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar, Adv. Mr. B.K. Prasad, AOR Mr. Sriram Parakkat, Adv. Mr. Shamshravish Rein, Adv. Ms. Athira R. Nair, Adv. Mr. Ankur Kulkarni, Adv. Mr. Aldanish Reins, Adv. Ms. Maheravish Rein, Adv. Mr. Anupam Lal Das, AOR Mr. Anish Maheshwari, Adv. Ms. Farha Malik, Adv. Ms. Rajeeta Raj, Adv. Mr. Prashant Choudhary, AOR Mr. Yunus Malik, Adv. Mr. Sanjeev Agarwal, AOR Mr. Mohit D. Ram, AOR Mr. Vinod Kapoor, Adv. Ms. Vidhi Goel, Adv. Mr. B.A.S. Jadon, Adv. Mr. Sandeep Bajaj, Adv. Ms. Akanksha Mehra, Adv. Mr. Rabin Majumder, Adv. Mr. Sunil Fernandes, Adv. Ms. Mithu Jain, Adv. Mr. Arnav Vidyarthi, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Heard Mr. Pratap Venugopal, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-SEBI, Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent-contemnor and Mr. Shekhar Naphade, learned amicus curiae . This Court on 5.7.2017, had directed as follows :-
4 “At that juncture, keeping in view the progress with regard to the report of the official liquidator, the Court observed as under :- “It is necessary to note that we had directed the Official Liquidator of the High Court of Bombay to proceed with the drafting of terms and conditions of sale notice for the Amby Valley property. Mr. Vinod Sharma, Official Liquidator submits that the terms and conditions have been scrutinized by Justice B.N. Agarwal, formerly a Judge of this Court, who has been nominated to supervise the refund process. A copy of the terms and conditions be handed over to the learned counsel for the contemnor. The original terms and conditions of the sale notice which have been filed in the Court be taken on record. Be it stated, the said documents have been filed with the report of the Official Liquidator being O.L.R. No.122 of 2017. The prayer for approval of the terms and conditions of sale notice shall be considered on the next date of hearing.” In view of the aforesaid, we are absolutely disinclined to entertain the prayer for extension of time for encashing the cheque amount for Rs.552.21 crores dated 15.7.2017. SEBI is directed to produce the cheque in the concerned bank in the relevant account. If the cheque is dishonoured, appropriate consequences shall be faced by the contemnor. At this stage, we think it appropriate to accept the terms and conditions and the draft proclamation for the auction of Ambey Vally. Further steps for acution shall be taken if the cheque is not honoured. At this juncture, it is submitted by Mr. Datar, learned senior counsel appearing for the SEBI that the property situated at Haridwar may require four more weeks to be auctioned as some portions are encumbered. Needless to say, the auction shall take place in respect of the unencumbered part of the Haridwar property and the same shall
5 be adjusted not towards the cheque amount but towards the balance amount. We may hasten to add that though we have approved the terms and conditions and the draft proclamation, we have not directed for auction today as the date of the cheque is 15.7.2017 and if the cheque is honoured, we shall direct for deposit of bigger amount so that the sum due, which is approximately nine thousand crores as on today, shall be expressly realized, for realization is of the money is the principal purpose of the present proceedings. The respondent-contemnor has deposited a sum of Rs.247 Crores. It is submitted by Mr. Sibal that the balance amount, that is, Rs.305.21 crores shall be deposited by 12.8.2017. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, learned counsel appearing for SEBI has serious objection to the same. At this Stage, Mr. Sibal earnestly urged that when the property has been attached and the valuation of the same is more than Rs.34,000 crores, this Court should grant time to deposit the amount and the reasonable time would be 18 months. Whether 18 month is reasonable or lesser time than that has to be debated. The issue, as presently perceived, is the bona fides of the respondent-contemnor and that can be spelt out or translated by action and the action is deposit of the dues in SEBI-Sahara account. Having heard learned counsel for the parties at length, it is directed that the respondent-contemnor shall deposit Rs.1500 crores (Rupees fifteen hundred crores only) which would include the balance amount of Rs.305.21 Crores by 7.9.2017. After due consideration, we have granted time till 7.9.2017, though Mr. Sibal, with all humility at his command, prayed for fixing the date some time in October, 2017. Though we appreciate the humble submission but we are not in a position to accede to the same. The grant of time, without
6 any steps taken by the Court, would tantamount to giving indulgence. Indulgence has the propensity to give rise to procrastination which is the murderer of justice. Therefore, we are disposed to think that the first two steps for sale of Ambey Vally Project shall be undertaken within this time and for the same we approve the draft sale notice submitted by the Official Liquidator and direct him that he shall take first two steps by updating the dates. The official liquidator shall publish the sale notice as given by him and the notice shall be published on 14.8.2017. The steps which are required to be taken for the publication of the sale notice are allowed. The amount that is required for publication shall be given from the SEBI Sahara Account. Mr. Pratap Venugopal shall see that the moment the official liquidator produce a letter, the amount shall be released to the official liquidator. The respondent-contemnor shall remain personally present in Court on the next date of hearing. Needless to say, the official liquidator shall remain present to assist the Court. The interim order to continue till then. Mr. Rabin Majumdar, learned counsel appearing for the applicant in IA No.265-266 of 2017 in Contempt Petition No.412 of 2012, on instructions, seeks leave of this Court to withdraw the I.As. The I.As. are dismissed as withdrawn. It is submitted by Mr. Naphade, learned amicus curiae that the sentence imposed on Mr. Prakash Swami is over and he has suffered the period of custody. Regard being had to the same, the authority concerned is directed to release the passport that was seized. Mr. Rana Mukherjee, learned senior
7 counsel appearing for the Union of India submits that he shall intimate the concerned officer to do the needful. List the matter at 2.00 p.m. on 11.9.2017. (Gulshan Kumar Arora) (H.S. Parasher) Court Master Court Master
8 ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IA 83/2015, 104/2015, 1/2015, 131/2015, 158/2016, 180/2016, 190/2016, 194/2016,205/2016,208/2016,209/2016,211/2016,218/2016, 227/2016, 231/2016, 232/2016, 239/2016, 240/2016, 241/2016, 256/2017, 257/2017, 260/2017, 268/2017, 273/2017, 280/2017, 284/2017, 39847/2017, 47133/2017, 47681/2017, 49580/2017 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (ONLY I.A.NOS.83-85/2015, 104-106/2015, 131/2015, 158-160/2016, 180-182/2016, 190-191/2016, 194-195/2016, 205-207/2016, 208/2016, 209-210/2016, 211/2016, 212-214/2016, 218-220/2016, 227/2016, 231/2016, 232/2016, 239/2016, 240/2016, 241/2016, 242/2016, 243/2016, 244-246/2016, 247/2017, 251-252, 253-255, 256, 257-259, 260-260/2017, 268-270/2017, 273-274/2017, 280-282/2017, 284-286/2017, 47133, 47681/2017 In CONMT.PET.(C) Nos. 412, 413/2012 In C.A. Nos. 9813 , 9833/2011 and C.P. (C) No. 260/2013 in C.A. No. 8643/2012 and IA No.60598/2017-EXTENSION OF TIME) Date : 25-07-2017 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI Mr. Shekhar Napahade, Sr. Adv. (A.C.) Ms. Shubhangi Tuli, Adv. Mr. Vikram Sobti, Adv. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Anuj Kumar Sarma, Adv. Ms. Niharika, Adv. Ms. Kanika Kalaiyarasan, Adv. Mr. Aman Shukla, Adv. for M/s. K. J. John & Co. For Respondent(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Mr. Salman Khurshid, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR
9 Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Tushar Gupta, Adv. Mr. Nizam Pasha, Adv. Mr. Simaranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv. Mr. Zafar Khurshid, Adv. Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Ms. Neha Gupta, Adv. Ms. Geetanjali Kapur, Adv. Ms. Sakshi Kotiyal, Adv. Mr. Mukul Rohtagi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Jain, Adv. Ms. Devanshi Singh, Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Tushar Gupta, Adv. Mr. Ashish Maheshwari, Adv. Mr. Zain Khan, Adv. Mr. Prashant Kumar, AOR Ms. Aarohi Bhalla, Adv. Mr. Ramesh Babu M. R., AOR Ms. Swati Setia, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar, AOR Mr. Rakesh Kr. Sharma, AOR Mr. Amit Anand Tiwari, AOR Mr. Yash Pal Dhingra, AOR Mr. P.N. Puri, AOR Mr. Vishwajeet Bhattacharya, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pawan Upadhyay, Adv. Mr. Sarvjit Pratap Singh, Adv. Mr. Akash Tyagi, Adv. Mr. Ratik Sharma, Adv. Ms. Sharmila Upadhyay, AOR Mr. Saiby Jose Kidangoor, Adv. Mr. C.K. Sasi, AOR Mr. G. Sivabalamurugan, AOR Ms. Vandana, Adv. Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AOR Mr. Rana Mukherjee, Sr. Adv.
10 Mr. D.L. Chidananda, Adv. Ms. Sadhna Sandhu, Adv. Mr. A.K. Srivastav, Adv. Ms. Sushma Manchanda, Adv. Mr. Nalin Kohli, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar, Adv. Mr. B.K. Prasad, AOR Mr. Sriram Parakkat, Adv. Mr. Shamshravish Rein, Adv. Ms. Athira R. Nair, Adv. Mr. Ankur Kulkarni, Adv. Mr. Aldanish Reins, Adv. Ms. Maheravish Rein, Adv. Mr. Anupam Lal Das, AOR Mr. Anish Maheshwari, Adv. Ms. Farha Malik, Adv. Ms. Rajeeta Raj, Adv. Mr. Prashant Choudhary, AOR Mr. Yunus Malik, Adv. Mr. Sanjeev Agarwal, AOR Mr. Mohit D. Ram, AOR Mr. Vinod Kapoor, Adv. Ms. Vidhi Goel, Adv. Mr. B.A.S. Jadon, Adv. Mr. Sandeep Bajaj, Adv. Ms. Akanksha Mehra, Adv. Mr. Rabin Majumder, Adv. Mr. Sunil Fernandes, Adv. Ms. Mithu Jain, Adv. Mr. Arnav Vidyarthi, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Heard Mr. Pratap Venugopal, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-SEBI, Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent-contemnor and Mr. Shekhar Naphade, learned amicus curiae . This Court on 5.7.2017, had directed as follows :-
11 “At that juncture, keeping in view the progress with regard to the report of the official liquidator, the Court observed as under :- “It is necessary to note that we had directed the Official Liquidator of the High Court of Bombay to proceed with the drafting of terms and conditions of sale notice for the Amby Valley property. Mr. Vinod Sharma, Official Liquidator submits that the terms and conditions have been scrutinized by Justice B.N. Agarwal, formerly a Judge of this Court, who has been nominated to supervise the refund process. A copy of the terms and conditions be handed over to the learned counsel for the contemnor. The original terms and conditions of the sale notice which have been filed in the Court be taken on record. Be it stated, the said documents have been filed with the report of the Official Liquidator being O.L.R. No.122 of 2017. The prayer for approval of the terms and conditions of sale notice shall be considered on the next date of hearing.” In view of the aforesaid, we are absolutely disinclined to entertain the prayer for extension of time for encashing the cheque amount for Rs.552.21 crores dated 15.7.2017. SEBI is directed to produce the cheque in the concerned bank in the relevant account. If the cheque is dishonoured, appropriate consequences shall be faced by the contemnor. At this stage, we think it appropriate to accept the terms and conditions and the draft proclamation for the auction of Ambey Vally. Further steps for acution shall be taken if the cheque is not honoured. At this juncture, it is submitted by Mr. Datar, learned senior counsel appearing for the SEBI that the property situated at Haridwar may require four more weeks to be auctioned as some portions are encumbered. Needless to say, the auction shall take place in respect of the unencumbered part of the Haridwar property and the same shall
12 be adjusted not towards the cheque amount but towards the balance amount. We may hasten to add that though we have approved the terms and conditions and the draft proclamation, we have not directed for auction today as the date of the cheque is 15.7.2017 and if the cheque is honoured, we shall direct for deposit of bigger amount so that the sum due, which is approximately nine thousand crores as on today, shall be expressly realized, for realization is of the money is the principal purpose of the present proceedings. The respondent-contemnor has deposited a sum of Rs.247 Crores. It is submitted by Mr. Sibal that the balance amount, that is, Rs.305.21 crores shall be deposited by 12.8.2017. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, learned counsel appearing for SEBI has serious objection to the same. At this Stage, Mr. Sibal earnestly urged that when the property has been attached and the valuation of the same is more than Rs.34,000 crores, this Court should grant time to deposit the amount and the reasonable time would be 18 months. Whether 18 month is reasonable or lesser time than that has to be debated. The issue, as presently perceived, is the bona fides of the respondent-contemnor and that can be spelt out or translated by action and the action is deposit of the dues in SEBI-Sahara account. Having heard learned counsel for the parties at length, it is directed that the respondent-contemnor shall deposit Rs.1500 crores (Rupees fifteen hundred crores only) which would include the balance amount of today by 7.9.2017. After due consideration, we have granted time till 7.9.2017, though Mr. Sibal, with all humility at his command, prayed for fixing the date some time in October, 2017. Though we appreciate the humble submission but we are not in a position to accede to the same. The grant of time, without any steps taken by the
13 Mr. Tushar Gupta, Adv. Mr. Nizam Pasha, Adv. Mr. Simaranjeet Singh, Adv. Court, would tantamount to giving indulgence. Indulgence has the propensity to give rise to procrastination which is the murderer of justice. Therefore, we are disposed to think that the first two steps for sale of Ambey Vally Project shall be undertaken within this time and for the same we approve the draft sale notice submitted by the Official Liquidator and direct him that he shall take first two steps by updating the dates. The official liquidator shall publish the sale notice as given by him and the notice shall be published on 14.8.2017. The steps which are required to be taken for the publication of the sale notice are allowed. The amount that is required for publication shall be given from the SEBI Sahara Account. Mr. Pratap Venugopal shall see that the moment the official liquidator produce a letter, the amount shall be released to the official liquidator. The respondent-contemnor shall remain personally present in Court on the next date of hearing. Needless to say, the official liquidator shall remain present to assist the Court. The interim order to continue till then. Mr. Rabin Majumdar, learned counsel appearing for the applicant in IA No.265-266 of 2017 in Contempt Petition No.412 of 2012, on instructions, seeks leave of this Court to withdraw the I.As. The I.As. are dismissed as withdrawn.
14 It is submitted by Mr. Naphade, learned amicus curiae that the sentence imposed on Mr. Prakash Swami is over and he has suffered the period of custody. Regard being had to the same, the authority concerned is directed to release the passport that was seized. Mr. Rana Mukherjee, learned senior counsel appearing for the Union of India submits that he shall intimate the concerned officer to do the needful. List the matter at 2.00 p.m. on 11.9.2017. (Gulshan Kumar Arora) (H.S. Parasher) Court Master Court Master
ITEM NO.8 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Civil Appeal No(s). 7152-7153/2016 SAHARA INDIA COMMERCIAL CORPORATION LIMITED Appellant(s) VERSUS SAHARA GRACE CONSUMER GRIEVANCES ASSOCIATION Respondent(s) WITH C.A. No. 9224-9225/2016 (XVII) Date : 06-07-2017 These appeals were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKAR For Appellant(s) Mr. Chaander Uday Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Rohan Thawani, Adv. Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AOR Mr. Hardeep Singh Anand, Adv. Mr. Anand Daga, Adv. Mr. Ajit Kumar Sinha, Sr. Adv. Gautam Talukdar, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Chaander Uday Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Rohan Thawani, Adv. Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AOR Mr. Hardeep Singh Anand, Adv. Mr. Anand Daga, Adv. Mr. Suryakant Singla, Adv. Ms. Supriya Juneja, AOR Mr. Aditya Singla, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R In pursuance of our earlier order, an amount of Rs.3,50,00,000/- (Rupees three crore and fifty lac only) has been deposited by the appellant and the same has been kept in a fixed deposit. We have been apprised that the respondents-Association, which is the respondent in Civil
2 Appeal No.7152 of 2016 has 30 memmbers and there are two respondents in Civil Appeal No.7153 of 2016. The National Consumer Disputes Redressal commission has granted different benefits to the members of the Association and the individual respondents in CA No.7153 of 2016. Keeping in view the entire controversy, we direct that the Registry shall disburse a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- to each of the members of the Association in CA No.7152 of 2016 on proper identification and after obtaining requisite affidavit. As far as the respondents in Civil Apepal No.7153 are concerned, they shall also be extended the same benefit of Rs.4,00,000/- (Rupees four lac only) on similar terms. It is submitted at the Bar that both the respondents are co-owners, and, therefore, they shall be given a total sum of Rs.4,00,000/- (Rupees four lac only). Needless to say, the present direction that has been passed keeping in view the grievance of the respondents and it shall be subject to final adjudication of the appeal. Let the matter be listed in the first week of November, 2017 for final disposal. (Gulshan Kumar Arora) (H.S. Parasher) Court Master Court Master
CP (C) 412/2012 ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. Nos.83-85/2015,104-106/2015, 131/2015, 158-160/2016, 180-182/2016, 190-191/2016, 194-195/2016, 205-207/2016, 208/2016, 209-210/2016, 211/2016,212-214/2016, 218-220/2016, 227/2016, 231/2016, 232/2016, 239/2016, 240/2016, 241/2016, 242/2016, 243/2016 & 244-246/2016, 247/2017, 251-252, 253-255, 256, 257-259, 260-262/2017, 268-270/2017, 273-274/2017, 280-282/2017, 284-286/2017, 47133 & 47681/2017 In CONMT.PET.(C) Nos.412 & 413/2012 In C.A. Nos.9813 & 9833/2011 And C.P.(C) No.260/2013 in C.A. No.8643/2012 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPORATION LTD. Respondent(s) & ORS. (Appln.(s) for intervention, clarification/direction, permission to place on record subsequent facts and for appropriate orders/directions) Date: 05/07/2017 These applications were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI Mr. Shekhar Napahade, Sr. Adv. (A.C.) Ms. Shubhangi Tuli, Adv. Mr. Vikram Sabbi, Adv. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Niharika, Adv. Ms. Kanika Kalayarasan, Adv. Mr. Aman Shukla, Adv. Mr. Purushottam Kumar ha, Adv. for M/s. K. J. John & Co. For Respondent(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Mr. Salman Khurshid, Sr. Adv.
CP (C) 412/2012 2 Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Tushar Gupta, Adv. Mr. Simaranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar Mr. Zafar Khurshid, Adv. Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Ms. Geetanjali Kapur, Adv. Mr. Nizam Pasha, Adv. Mr. Sakshi Katiyal, Adv. Mr. Mukul Rohatgi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. Mr. A. Chaudhary, Adv. Ms. Devanshi Singh, Adv. Mr.Prashant Kumar, AOR Mr. Prashant Kumar, AOR Mr. Ramesh Babu M. R., AOR Ms. Swati Setia, Adv. Mr. Maninder singh, ASG Mr. Rana Mukherjee, Adv. Mr. D.L. Chidananda, Adv. Mr. A.K. Srivastava, Adv. Ms. Sadhana Sandhu, Adv. Mr. Sushma Manchanda, Adv. Ms. Nalini Kohli, Adv. Mr. B.K. Prasad, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar, AOR Mr. Rakesh Kr. Sharma, AOR Mr. Amit Anand Tiwari, AOR Mr. Yash Pal Dhingra, AOR Mr. P.N. Puri, AOR Mr. Biswajeet Bhattachary, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pawan Upadhyay, Adv. Mr. S. Pratap Singh, Adv. Ms. Sharmila Upadhyay, AOR Mr. C.K. Sasi, AOR Mr. Mayil Samy K., Adv. Mr. K.p. Narayanan, Adv. Mr. Ram Sankar, Adv. Mr. P. Soma Sundaram, AOR
CP (C) 412/2012 3 Mr. Ratnakar Dash, Sr. Adv. Mr. G. Sivabalamurugan, AOR Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AOR Mr. Ankur S. Kulkarni, AOR Mr. Anupam Lal Das, AOR Mr. Prashant Choudhary, AOR Mr. Sanjeev Agarwal, AOR Mr. Mohit D. Ram, AOR Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh, AOR Mrs. Shally Bhasin, AOR Mr. Kaushik Anand Satpathy, Adv. Ms. Vidhi Goel, Adv. Mr. Tushar Mehta, ASG Mr. Hemantika Wahi, AOR Mr. Shodhika Sharma, Adv. Mr. Ajay Chokshi, Adv. Mr. B.A.S. Jadon, Adv. Mr. Balbir Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. S. Qureshi, Adv. Mr. R. Haini, Adv. Mr. Rabin Majumdar, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R On 19.6.2017, after noting prayers in I.A. No.47681 of 2017, the following order was passed : “Be it noted, on the previous occasion, i.e. 27 th April, 2017, the contemnor had furnished two post-dated cheques, one dated 15 th June, 2017, for Rs.1500,00,00,000/- (Rupees fifteen hundred crores only) and the second one dated 15 th July, 2017, for a sum of Rs.552,21,00,000/- (Rupees five hundred fifty-two crores and twenty-one lakhs only). An assurance was given by Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel
CP (C) 412/2012 4 appearing for the petitioner, as well as by the contemnor, who was present in the Court, that the cheques shall be honoured. It was directed that if there will be a failure, the contemnor may be sent to custody. It is submitted by Mr. Sibal relying on the application filed by the contemnor that till today they have deposited Rs.774 crores in SEBI Sahara Refund Account and today he has handed over eighteen demand drafts amounting to Rs.16,11,95,000/- (Rupees sixteen crores eleven lakhs and ninety-five thousand) in favour of SEBI Sahara Refund Account. The total amount that has been deposited in SEBI Sahara Refund Account comes to Rs.790.18 crores. Thus, the balance sum to be paid is Rs.709.82 crores. At this juncture, it is submitted by Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel that there is a property situated in villages Bahadrabad and Ranipur, Haridwar in the State of Uttarakhand, admeasuring 87.03 acres and he has arranged a buyer, who is prepared to purchase the said property for Rs.109.75 crores. The said amount is 62% of the circle rate and, thereby, less than 38% of the circle rate. Permission is sought to sell the property at that rate. As advised at present, we are not inclined to grant the said permission. We think that the said property shall be put to public auction by S.E.B.I with the assistance of approved agency. In the bid, S.E.B.I. can mention 90% of the circle rate, as some time this Court had permitted at that rate. The auction shall be conducted by the competent authority of S.E.B.I. through the approved agency on or before 5 th July, 2017. Needless to say, e-auction can be done in respect of this property. As the contemnor has deposited Rs.790.18 crores, we are inclined to extend the time by ten working days so that the undertaking can be complied with. The balance amount i.e. Rs.709.82 crores shall be deposited with the SEBI Sahara Refund Account by 4 th July, 2017. The prayer No.(ii) in the interlocutory application relates to grant of permission for sale of Grosvenor House
CP (C) 412/2012 5 Hotel, i.e. by transfer of shares of the company to the buyer i.e. GH Equity U.K. Limited. Mr. Arvind P. Datar, learned senior counsel appearing for the S.E.B.I. has no objection if such permission is granted. The permission is, accordingly, granted.” Today, it is submitted by Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel appearing for the contemnor that a sum of Rs.710.22 crore has already been transferred to SEBI Sahara Account. Thus, the total amount that has been received by the SEBI Sahara Account is Rs.1500.40 crores. Thus, the commitment given on 19.6.2017 as regards the first cheque stands satisfied. Be it stated, a cheque amounting to Rs.552.21 crores only dated 15.7.2017 was given to SEBI. A prayer has been made to extend the time for honouring the same. A submission has been advanced, with all anxiety at the command of Mr. Sibal, that at least time should be granted till 15.8.2017 so that arrangements can be made to pay the amount and prepare a road map. At this juncture, we are obliged to sit in a time machine and recall what this Court had stated on 27.4.2017. On that day, it was noted that a cheque amounting to Rs.552.21 crores had been deposited and it was to be honoured by 15.7.2017. On 19.6.2017, when the Court assembled in the summer vacation (as the first cheque was to be honoured on 15.6.2017) we noted the development as per the order extracted hereinabove.
CP (C) 412/2012 6 On that day, an assurance was given that the cheque for the sum of Rs.552.21 crores shall be honoured on 15.7.2017. At that juncture, keeping in view the progress with regard to the report of the official liquidator, the Court observed as under :- “It is necessary to note that we had directed the Official Liquidator of the High Court of Bombay to proceed with the drafting of terms and conditions of sale notice for the Amby Valley property. Mr. Vinod Sharma, Official Liquidator submits that the terms and conditions have been scrutinized by Justice B.N. Agarwal, formerly a Judge of this Court, who has been nominated to supervise the refund process. A copy of the terms and conditions be handed over to the learned counsel for the contemnor. The original terms and conditions of the sale notice which have been filed in the Court be taken on record. Be it stated, the said documents have been filed with the report of the Official Liquidator being O.L.R. No.122 of 2017. The prayer for approval of the terms and conditions of sale notice shall be considered on the next date of hearing.” In view of the aforesaid, we are absolutely disinclined to entertain the prayer for extension of time for encashing the cheque amount for Rs.552.21 crores dated 15.7.2017. SEBI is directed to produce the cheque in the concerned bank in the relevant account. If the cheque is dishonoured, appropriate consequences shall be faced by the contemnor. At this stage, we think it appropriate to accept the terms and conditions and the draft proclamation for the auction of Ambey Vally. Further steps for acution shall be taken if the cheque is not honoured.
CP (C) 412/2012 7 At this juncture, it is submitted by Mr. Datar, learned senior counsel appearing for the SEBI that the property situated at Haridwar may require four more weeks to be auctioned as some portions are encumbered. Needless to say, the auction shall take place in respect of the unencumbered part of the Haridwar property and the same shall be adjusted not towards the cheque amount but towards the balance amount. We may hasten to add that though we have approved the terms and conditions and the draft proclamation, we have not directed for auction today as the date of the cheque is 15.7.2017 and if the cheque is honoured, we shall direct for deposit of bigger amount so that the sum due, which is approximately nine thousand crores as on today, shall be expressly realized, for realization is of the money is the principal purpose of the present proceedings. In pursuance of our earlier order, the contemnor is personally present in the Court today. He shall remain personally present on the next date of hearing. Let the matter be listed at 3.30 p.m. on 20.07.2017. Interim order to continue till the next date of hearing. (Gulshan Kumar Arora) Court Master (H.S. Parasher) Court Master
CP (C) 412/2012 1 ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. Nos.83-85/2015,104-106/2015, 131/2015, 158-160/2016, 180-182/2016, 190-191/2016, 194-195/2016, 205-207/2016, 208/2016, 209-210/2016, 211/2016,212-214/2016, 218-220/2016, 227/2016,231/2016, 232/2016, 239/2016, 240/2016, 241/2016, 242/2016, 243/2016 & 244-246/2016, 247/2017, 251-252, 253-255, 256, 257-259, 260-262/2017, 268-270/2017, 273-274/2017, 280-282/2017, 284-286/2017, 47133 & 47681/2017 In CONMT.PET.(C) Nos.412 & 413/2012 In C.A. Nos.9813 & 9833/2011 And C.P.(C) No.260/2013 in C.A. No.8643/2012 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPORATION LTD. Respondent(s) & ORS. (Appln.(s) for intervention, clarification/direction, permission to place on record subsequent facts and for appropriate orders/directions) WITH R.P.(Crl.) No.458/2014 in W.P.(Crl.) No.57/2014 Date: 19/06/2017 These applications were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI Mr. Shekhar Napahade, Sr. Adv. (A.C.) (N/P) For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Anuj Sarma, Adv.
CP (C) 412/2012 2 Ms. Niharika, Adv. Ms. Kanika Kalayarasan, Adv. for M/s. K. J. John & Co. RP(Crl.) 458/14 Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Mr. Salman Khurshid, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Tushar Gupta, Adv. Mr. Simaranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Zafar Khurshid, Adv. Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Ms. Geetanjali Kapur, Adv. Mr. Aditya Chopra, Adv. Mr. Sarthak Nayak, Adv. Mr. Prashant Kumar, AOR Mr. Ramesh Babu M. R., AOR Ms. Swati Setia, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar, AOR Mr. Rakesh Kr. Sharma, AOR Mr. Amit Anand Tiwari, AOR Mr. Yash Pal Dhingra, AOR Mr. P.N. Puri, AOR Mr. Biswajeet Bhattachary, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pawan Upadhyay, Adv. Mr. Akash Tyagi, Adv. Ms. Sharmila Upadhyay, AOR Mr. Saiby Jose K., Adv. Mr. C.K. Sasi, AOR Mr. Mahalakshmi Pavani, Sr. Adv. Mr. P. Soma Sundaram, Adv. Mr. G. Sivabalamurugan, AOR Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AOR
CP (C) 412/2012 3 Mr. D.L. Chidananda, Adv. Mr. A.K. Srivastava, Adv. Ms. Sadhana Sandhu, Adv. Mr. M.K. Maroria, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar, Adv. Ms. Sushma Manchanda, Adv. Mr. B.K. Prasad, AOR Mr. Ankur S. Kulkarni, AOR Mr. Anupam Lal Das, AOR Mr. Prashant Choudhary, AOR Mr. Sanjeev Agarwal, AOR Mr. Mohit D. Ram, AOR Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh, AOR Mrs. Shally Bhasin, AOR Mr. Kaushik Anand Satpathy, Adv. Ms. Vidhi Goel, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R I.A. No.47681 of 2017 This is an application seeking certain directions. The directions that have been sought by the contemnor in this interlocutory application read as follows:- “(i) grant an extension of 10 working days for complying with the undertaking dated 27.04.2017; (ii) pass an order permitting the sale of Grosvenor House Hotel, i.e. by transfer of shares of the company to the buyer and to enter into the
CP (C) 412/2012 4 agreement for refinancing facility in respect of the Plaza Hotel and the Dreams Downtown Hotel, New York; (iii) permit Saharas to sale their lands at the price less than 90% of circle rate, in order to comply the directions of this Hon'ble Court; (iv) accept the properties of Saharas as a security for the balance principal amount instead of cash deposit; and (v) to vacate the order dated 21.11.2013 passed by this Hon'ble Court, lifting the embargoes on the Sahara Group of Companies, so that Saharas can raise money out of their assets and run, promote their businesses, in the interest of justice, equity and fair play. Be it noted, on the previous occasion, i.e. 27 th April, 2017, the contemnor had furnished two post-dated cheques, one dated 15 th June, 2017, for Rs.1500,00,00,000/- (Rupees fifteen hundred crores only) and the second one dated 15 th July, 2017, for a sum of Rs.552,21,00,000/- (Rupees five hundred fifty-two crores and twenty-one lakhs only). An assurance was given by Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner, as well as by the contemnor, who was present in the Court, that the cheques shall be honoured. It was directed that if there will be a failure, the contemnor may be sent to custody. It is submitted by Mr. Sibal relying on the application filed by the contemnor that till today they have deposited Rs.774 crores in SEBI Sahara Refund Account and today he has handed
CP (C) 412/2012 5 over eighteen demand drafts amounting to Rs.16,11,95,000/- (Rupees sixteen crores eleven lakhs and ninety-five thousand) in favour of SEBI Sahara Refund Account. The total amount that has been deposited in SEBI Sahara Refund Account comes to Rs.790.18 crores. Thus, the balance sum to be paid is Rs.709.82 crores. At this juncture, it is submitted by Mr. Sibal, learned senior counsel that there is a property situate in villages Bahadrabad and Ranipur, Haridwar in the State of Uttarakhand, admeasuring 87.03 acres and he has arranged a buyer, who is prepared to purchase the said property for Rs.109.75 crores. The said amount is 62% of the circle rate and, thereby, less than 38% of the circle rate. Permission is sought to sell the property at that rate. As advised at present, we are not inclined to grant the said permission. We think that the said property shall be put to public auction by S.E.B.I with the assistance of approved agency. In the bid, S.E.B.I. can mention 90% of the circle rate, as some time this Court had permitted at that rate. The auction shall be conducted by the competent authority of S.E.B.I. through the approved agency on or before 5 th July, 2017. Needless to say, e-auction can be done in respect of this property. As the contemnor has deposited Rs.790.18 crores, we are inclined to extend the time by ten working days so that the undertaking can be complied with. The balance amount i.e. Rs.709.82 crores shall be deposited with the SEBI Sahara Refund Account by 4 th July, 2017. The prayer No.(ii) in the interlocutory application relates to grant of permission for sale of Grosvenor House Hotel, i.e. by transfer of shares of the company to the buyer
CP (C) 412/2012 6 i.e. GH Equity U.K. Limited. Mr. Arvind P. Datar, learned senior counsel appearing for the S.E.B.I. has no objection if such permission is granted. The permission is, accordingly, granted. As far as prayer No.(iii) is concerned, we have already directed for auction of the property. Therefore, no further order need be passed on the said prayer. As far as the prayer Nos.(iv) and (v) are concerned, we are not inclined to pass any order thereon and, accordingly, they are rejected at this stage. At this juncture, it is necessary to note that we had directed the Official Liquidator of the High Court of Bombay to proceed with the drafting of terms and conditions of sale notice for the Amby Valley property. Mr. Vinod Sharma, Official Liquidator submits that the terms and conditions have been scrutinized by Justice B.N. Agarwal, formerly a Judge of this Court, who has been nominated to supervise the refund process. A copy of the terms and conditions be handed over to the learned counsel for the contemnor. The original terms and conditions of the sale notice which have been filed in the Court be taken on record. Be it stated, the said documents have been filed with the report of the Official Liquidator being O.L.R. No.122 of 2017. The prayer for approval of the terms and conditions of sale notice shall be considered on the next date of hearing. Let the matter be listed at 3.30 p.m. on 5 th July, 2017. If the balance amount is not paid by that date, we will be compelled to send the contemnor to the custody and we are sure he shall not give rise to such an occasion.
CP (C) 412/2012 7 The interim order passed on the earlier occasion to continue till the next date of hearing. (Chetan Kumar) Court Master (H.S. Parasher) Court Master
ITEM NO.48 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Civil Appeal No(s). 7152-7153/2016 SAHARA INDIA COMMERCIAL CORPORATION LIMITED Appellant(s) VERSUS SAHARA GRACE CONSUMER GRIEVANCES ASSOCIATION Respondent(s) (with appln. (s) for permission to file additional documents and stay and office report) WITH C.A. No. 9224-9225/2016 (With WITH Office Report) Date : 01/05/2017 These appeals were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR For Appellant(s) Mr. Ajit Kumar Sinha, Sr. Adv. Mr. Rohan Ahuja, Adv. Ms. Sonali Dhir, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, AOR Mr. Rohan Thawani, Adv. Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AOR Mr. Hardeep Singh Anand, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Rohan Thawani, Adv. Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AOR Mr. Hardeep Singh Anand, Adv. Mr. Aditya Singla, Adv. Ms. Supriya Juneja, AOR Ms. Mehaak Jaggi, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R In terms of the letter circulated by learned counsel for the appellant, let the matter be listed after four weeks. (Gulshan Kumar Arora) (H.S. Parasher) Court Master Court Master
SECTION XVII IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 71527153 OF 2016 with INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NOS. 34,56 and 78 OF 2016 (Application for permission to file additional documents ,Stay and permission to file additional documents and CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 92249225 OF 2016 Sahara India Commercial Corporation Ltd. Etc ...Appellants VERSUS Sahara Grace Consumer Greivances Association Etc. ...Respondents OFFICE REPORT The matters above mentioned were listed before the Hon'ble Court on 21 st November,2016 when the Court was pleased to interalia pass the following order: “Let the matter be listed on a non-miscellaneous day in the third week of February, 2017 for final disposal. Pleadings shall be complete by that time. ” It is submitted that Ms. Vandan Sehgal and MS. Supriya Juneja has entered appearance on behalf of both the respondents. Counsel for the respondents in Civil Appeal No. 7153 of 2016 has also filed short reply. Counsel for the respondent has on 07.03.2017 filed counter affidavit on behalf of the sole respondent in Civil Appeal No. 7152 of 2016. (Copies are circulated herewith) Counsel for the appellant has on 17.10.2016 deposited amount of Rs. 3.50 Crores in the Registry of this Hon'ble court in view of the order dated 05.09.2016 which was invested in FDR has increased to Rs. 3,54,39,792/- and is now reinvested in FDR which bears maturity till 23.01.2018. Service is complete in the matter. CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 92249225 OF 2016 It is submitted that notice was issued to the sole respondent through registered A.D. Delivery report on postal authority website states that notice was returned without remarks. Though the sole respondent is common as the appellant in the connected matter C.A. 7152-7153 of 2016. The matters are listed before the Hon'ble Court with this office report. DATED THIS THE 28 th DAY OF APRIL, 2017. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
¾ITEM NO.48 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSCivil Appeal No(s). 7152-7153/2016SAHARA INDIA COMMERCIAL CORPORATION LIMITED Appellant(s) VERSUSSAHARA GRACE CONSUMER GRIEVANCES ASSOCIATION Respondent(s)(with appln. (s) for permission to file additional documents and stay and office report)WITHC.A. No. 9224-9225/2016(With WITH Office Report)Date : 01/05/2017 These appeals were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDARFor Appellant(s) Mr. Ajit Kumar Sinha, Sr. Adv.Mr. Rohan Ahuja, Adv.Ms. Sonali Dhir, Adv.Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv.Mr. Gautam Talukdar, AOR Mr. Rohan Thawani, Adv.Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AORMr. Hardeep Singh Anand, Adv.For Respondent(s) Mr. Rohan Thawani, Adv.Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AORMr. Hardeep Singh Anand, Adv. Mr. Aditya Singla, Adv.Ms. Supriya Juneja, AORMs. Mehaak Jaggi, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RIn terms of the letter circulated by learned counsel for the appellant, let the matter be listed after four weeks.(Gulshan Kumar Arora) (H.S. Parasher)Court Master Court Master
CP 412/2012 ITEM NO.301+302 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII & X S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. Nos.83-85/2015,104-106/2015, 131/2015, 158-160/2016, 180-182/2016, 190-191/2016, 194-195/2016, 205-207/2016, 208/2016, 209-210/2016, 211/2016,212-214/2016, 218-220/2016, 227/2016,231/2016, 232/2016, 239/2016, 240/2016, 241/2016, 242/2016, 243/2016 & 244-246/2016, 247/2017, 251-252, 253-255, 256, 257-259, 260-262/2017, 268-270/2017, 273-274/2017 & 284-286/2017 In CONMT.PET.(C) Nos.412 & 413/2012 In C.A. Nos.9813 & 9833/2011 And C.P.(C) No.260/2013 In C.A. No.8643/2012 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (For directions, impleadment and intervention, appropriate orders and provisional release and office report) WITH R.P. (Crl.) No. 458/2014 in WP (Crl) No.57/2014 Date: 27/04/2017 These applications were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI Mr. Shekhar Napahade, Sr. Adv. (A.C.) For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Anuj Kumar Sarma, Adv. Ms. Niharika, Adv. Ms. Kanika Kalaiyarasan, Adv. Mr. Aman Shukla, Adv. for M/s. K. J. John & Co. For Respondent(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Mr. Salman Khurshid, Sr. Adv. Mr. Narendra Hooda, Sr. Adv.
CP 412/2012 2 Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Zafar Khurshid, Adv. Mr. Sarthak Nayak, Adv. Mr. Tushar Gupta, Adv. Mr. Aviral Dhindsa, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv. Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Ms. Neha Gupta, Adv. Ms. Geetanjali Kapur, Adv. Mr. Prashant Kumar, AOR Mr. Ramesh Babu M. R., AOR Ms. Swati Setia, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar, AOR Mr. Rakesh Kr. Sharma, AOR Mr. Amit Anand Tiwari, AOR Mr. Yash Pal Dhingra, AOR Mr. P.N. Puri, AOR Mr. Biswajeet Bhattacharya, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pawan Upadhyay, Adv. Mr. Sarvjit Pratap Singh, Adv. Mr. Akash Tyagi, Adv. Ms. Sharmila Upadhyay, AOR Mr. Saiby Jose Kidangoor, Adv. Mr. C.K. Sasi, AOR Mr. G. Sivabalamurugan, AOR Ms. Vandana, Adv. Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AOR Mr. Rana Mukherjee, Sr. Adv. Mr. D.L. Chidananda, Adv. Ms. Sadhna Sandhu, Adv. Mr. M.K. Maroria, Adv. Mr. A.K. Srivastav, Adv. Ms. Sushma Manchanda, Adv.
CP 412/2012 3 Mr. Nalin Kohli, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar, Adv. Mr. B.K. Prasad, AOR Mr. Sriram Parakkat, Adv. Mr. Vishnu Shankar M.S., Adv. Mr. Vishnu Jain, Adv. Ms. Athira G. Nair, Adv. Mr. Ankur S. Kulkarni, AOR Mr. Anupam Lal Das, AOR Mr. Anish Maheshwari, Adv. Ms. Farha Malik, Adv. Ms. Rajeeta Raj, Adv. Mr. Prashant Choudhary, AOR Mr. Yunus Malik, Adv. Mr. Sanjeev Agarwal, AOR Mr. Mohit D. Ram, AOR Ms. B. Vijayalakshmi Menon, Adv. Mr. Vinod Kapoor, Adv. Mr. B.A.S. Jadon, Adv. Mr. Sandeep Bajaj, Adv. Mr. Aditya Chopra, Adv. Mr. Rabin Majumder, Adv. Mr. Sunil Fernandes, Adv. Ms. Mithu Jain, Adv. Mr. Arnav Vidyarthi, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R In pursuance of our order dated 17.4.2017, Mr. Vinod Sharma, the Official Liquidator of the Bombay High court along with Ms. Yogini D. Chauhan, Deputy Official Liquidator and Mr. Amish Sharma, the Valuer are present. Mr. Sharma has filed the report of the Official Liquidator (OLR No.97 of 2017) along with the executive summary in respect of the
CP 412/2012 4 Aamby Valley City property. For the sake of convenience, we reproduce the same :- “ Executive Summary Valuation of Immovable Asset (Land & Building) Valuation if within Aamby Valley City Land is considered at Ready Recknor Rate Fair Market Value in INR (after taking discounting factor for land within Aamby Valley City) Realizable Value in INR (at 90 % of Fair Market Value) Distress Value in INR at 80% of Fair Market Value Valuation of Building & Constructed Area 219366,34,884 219366,34,884 197429,71,396 175493,07,907 Valuation of Land within Aamby Valley City 4046117,25,215 3439199,66,433 3095279,69,789 2751359,73,146 Valuation of Land held by Aamby Valley Ltd outside of Aamby Valley City 46329,19,900 46329,19,900 41696,27,910 37063,35,920 Land Held by Aamby Valley City at District Satara 5582,83,000 5582,83,000 5024,54,700 4466,26,400 Total Value of Immovable Asset (Land & Building) 4317395,62,999 3710478,04,217 3339430,23,795 2968382,43,373 Valuation of Movable Asset Inventory Held at Central Project Store at Service Zone Area 3097,24,453 3097,24,453 2787,52,008 2477,79,563 Closing Stock Food & Beverage Located at Town Plaza Operation Store as on 22.4.2017 152,43,393 152,43,393 137,19,053 121,94,714 Summary of Movable Assets held within the Aamby Valley City 25450,79,065 25450,79,065 22905,71,158 20360,63,252 Total Value of Movable Asset 28700,46,910 28700,46,910 25830,42,219 22960,37,528 Total Value of Asset (Movable & Immovable) 4346096,09,909 3739178,51,127 3365260,66,014 2991342,80,902 OR SAY 43,461 Crores 37,392 Crores 33,653 Crores 29,913 Crores Remark:- For Land Within Aamby Valley City:- Average Govt ready recknor rate is 53612.50 Rs Per Sq Meter. But in the present market scenario for real estate market specially after Demonetisation, availability of buyer at this price are very rare. So it require discounting hence We are considering 15% discounting factor from Govt ready recknor rate to arrive at the fair market value of this land.”
CP 412/2012 5 It is submitted by Mr. Vinod Sharma that this Court may fix a reserve fair price and instruct to proceed with the formalities of auction by preparing the draft terms and conditions and other formalities. At this juncture, Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel appearing for the contemnor, Subrata Roy Sahara, who is also present in pursuance of our earlier order, has filed an affidavit of undertaking. The relevant part of the said affidavit of undertaking, duly signed by Mr. Subrata Roy Shara, reads as follows :- “ 5. That towards the payment of the aforesaid first two instalments, being the first instalment of Rs.1500 Crores and the second instalment of Rs.552.21 Crores, the deponent is submitting two post dated cheque, being the cheque no.283549 dated 15.06.2017 drawn on Punjab National Bank, Mahanagar Branch, Lucknow for an amount of Rs.15,00,00,00,000/- (Rupees fifteen Hundred Crores only) and cheque no.283550 dated 15.07.2017 drawn on Punjab National Bank, Mahanagar Branch, Lucknow for an amount of Rs.552,21,00,000/- (Rs. Five Hudnred Fifty Two Crores Twenty two lakh only) both drawn in favour of SEBI Shara Refund Account No.012210110003740. 6. That the deponent submits and assures to this Hon'ble Court that the said cheque would be honoured and encashed in all circumstances, on presentation on the due date, for which the deponent undertakes and assures to this Hon'ble Court.” We are not referring to the earlier paragraphs inasmuch as they contain assurance for the distant future. We are
CP 412/2012 6 concerned with the present and not with the distant future as that is not the duty of the Court in a contempt proceeding. At this juncture, it is submitted by Mr. Shekhar Naphade, learned Amicus Curiae and Mr. Arvind Datar, learned senior counsel appearing for the SEBI being assisted by Mr. Pratap Vanugopal, learned counsel that the contemnor, as on today, owes approximately Rs. 11,169 Crores towards the principal and that is required to be paid. As the affidavit would show, the first cheque is for Rs.1500,00,00,000/- dated 15.6.2017 and the second cheque is dated 15.7.2017 for a sum of Rs.552,21,00,000/-. The affidavit shows assurance to see to it that the cheques shall be honoured in all circumstances on presentation on the due date. On being asked, the contemnor submitted that it is his obligation to see that the cheques are encashed failing which he may be sent to custody. At this juncture, Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel submitted that the petitioner may be granted liberty to send Rs.1500,00,00,000/- (Rupees one thousand five hundred crores only) in the accounts of SEBI Sahara Refund Account through RTGS on or before 15.6.2017. Mr. Arvind Datar, learned senior counsel appearing for the SEBI submitted that he has no objection. If the amount comes to the account by electronic transaction, SEBI shall return the cheque
CP 412/2012 7 amounting to Rs.1500,00,00,000/- (Rupees one thousand five hundred crore only). Regard being had to the submissions of the official liquidator and the affidavit that has been filed by the contemnor, we direct that the reserved price for the purpose of auction be fixed at Rs.37,392 Crores. The Official Liquidator shall proceed in accordance with the Rules of procedure and prepare a draft terms and conditions and sale notice and the same shall be filed for our approval on 19.6.2017. The terms and conditions for the auction shall be finalised by Mr. Vinod Sharma, the Official Liquidator in consultation with Mr. Justice B.N. Agarwal, formerly a Judge of this Court. The official liquidator will be at liberty to avail the expertise of an expert for drafting the terms and conditions. The official liquidator shall remain personally present with his team, on the next date of hearing. List the matter at 10.30 a.m. on 19.6.2017. Be it clarified that the matter is directed to e listed on that day to scrutinise the action/steps taken in pursuance of the order passed today. The interim order shall remain in force till then. I.A. 247/2017 In pursuance of our earlier order, Mr. Prakash Swami, the
CP 412/2012 8 power of attorney holder for M.G. Capital Holdings is present. The sum of Rs.10,00,00,000/- (Rupees ten crore only) has not yet been deposited. In view of the aforesaid, he is in violation of the order passed by this Court. Having heard his explanation which is not satisfactory, we hold him guilty of contempt of this Court and convict him accordingly. We have heard Mr. Prakash Swami, who is present in the Court on sentence as well. He says that he is not a stake holder or a partner and on the basis of personal friendship, he had filed the affidavit and that he is a retired person and has no source of income. Regard being had to the explanation offered, we think it appropriate to impose a simple imprisonment for a terms of one month. The Police personnel present in Court are directed to produce Mr. Prakash Swami before the concerned Registrar of this Court, who shall issue a warrant so that he can be put in Tihar Jail to serve the aforesaid sentence. (Gulshan Kumar Arora) Court Master (H.S. Parasher) Court Master
ª^CP 412/2012ITEM NO.301+302 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII & X S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSI.A. Nos.83-85/2015,104-106/2015, 131/2015, 158-160/2016,180-182/2016, 190-191/2016, 194-195/2016, 205-207/2016, 208/2016,209-210/2016, 211/2016,212-214/2016, 218-220/2016,227/2016,231/2016, 232/2016, 239/2016, 240/2016, 241/2016, 242/2016, 243/2016 & 244-246/2016, 247/2017, 251-252, 253-255,256, 257-259, 260-262/2017, 268-270/2017, 273-274/2017 & 284-286/2017 In CONMT.PET.(C) Nos.412 & 413/2012 In C.A. Nos.9813 & 9833/2011AndC.P.(C) No.260/2013 In C.A. No.8643/2012S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(For directions, impleadment and intervention, appropriate ordersand provisional release and office report)WITHR.P. (Crl.) No. 458/2014 in WP (Crl) No.57/2014Date: 27/04/2017 These applications were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI Mr. Shekhar Napahade, Sr. Adv. (A.C.)For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv.Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv.Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv.Mr. Anuj Kumar Sarma, Adv.Ms. Niharika, Adv.Ms. Kanika Kalaiyarasan, Adv.Mr. Aman Shukla, Adv. for M/s. K. J. John & Co. For Respondent(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv.Mr. Salman Khurshid, Sr. Adv.Mr. Narendra Hooda, Sr. Adv.CP 412/2012 2 Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AORMr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv.Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv.Mr. Zafar Khurshid, Adv.Mr. Sarthak Nayak, Adv.Mr. Tushar Gupta, Adv.Mr. Aviral Dhindsa, Adv.Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv.Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv.Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav, Adv.Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv.Ms. Neha Gupta, Adv.Ms. Geetanjali Kapur, Adv. Mr. Prashant Kumar, AOR Mr. Ramesh Babu M. R., AORMs. Swati Setia, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar, AOR Mr. Rakesh Kr. Sharma, AOR Mr. Amit Anand Tiwari, AOR Mr. Yash Pal Dhingra, AOR Mr. P.N. Puri, AORMr. Biswajeet Bhattacharya, Sr. Adv.Mr. Pawan Upadhyay, Adv.Mr. Sarvjit Pratap Singh, Adv.Mr. Akash Tyagi, Adv. Ms. Sharmila Upadhyay, AORMr. Saiby Jose Kidangoor, Adv. Mr. C.K. Sasi, AOR
Mr. G. Sivabalamurugan, AORMs. Vandana, Adv. Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AORMr. Rana Mukherjee, Sr. Adv.Mr. D.L. Chidananda, Adv.Ms. Sadhna Sandhu, Adv.Mr. M.K. Maroria, Adv.Mr. A.K. Srivastav, Adv.Ms. Sushma Manchanda, Adv.CP 412/2012 3Mr. Nalin Kohli, Adv.Mrs. Anil Katiyar, Adv.Mr. B.K. Prasad, AORMr. Sriram Parakkat, Adv.Mr. Vishnu Shankar M.S., Adv.Mr. Vishnu Jain, Adv.Ms. Athira G. Nair, Adv.Mr. Ankur S. Kulkarni, AORMr. Anupam Lal Das, AORMr. Anish Maheshwari, Adv.Ms. Farha Malik, Adv.Ms. Rajeeta Raj, Adv.Mr. Prashant Choudhary, AORMr. Yunus Malik, Adv.Mr. Sanjeev Agarwal, AORMr. Mohit D. Ram, AORMs. B. Vijayalakshmi Menon, Adv.Mr. Vinod Kapoor, Adv.Mr. B.A.S. Jadon, Adv.Mr. Sandeep Bajaj, Adv.Mr. Aditya Chopra, Adv.Mr. Rabin Majumder, Adv.Mr. Sunil Fernandes, Adv.Ms. Mithu Jain, Adv.Mr. Arnav Vidyarthi, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RIn pursuance of our order dated 17.4.2017, Mr. VinodSharma, the Official Liquidator of the Bombay High courtalong with Ms. Yogini D. Chauhan, Deputy Official Liquidatorand Mr. Amish Sharma, the Valuer are present. Mr. Sharma hasfiled the report of the Official Liquidator (OLR No.97 of2017) along with the executive summary in respect of theCP 412/2012 4Aamby Valley City property. For the sake of convenience, wereproduce the same :-⬠S Executive SummaryValuation of Immovable Asset (Land & Building) Valuation if within Aamby Valley City Land is considered at Ready Recknor Rate Fair Market Value in INR (after taking discounting factor for land within Aamby Valley City) Realizable Value in INR (at 90 % of Fair Market Value) Distress Value in INR at 80% of Fair Market ValueValuation of Building & Constructed Area 219366,34,884 219366,34,884 197429,71,396 175493,07,907Valuation of Land within Aamby Valley City 4046117,25,215 3439199,66,433 3095279,69,789 2751359,73,146
Valuation of Land held by Aamby Valley Ltd outside of Aamby Valley City 46329,19,900 46329,19,900 41696,27,910 37063,35,920Land Held by Aamby Valley City at District Satara 5582,83,000 5582,83,000 5024,54,700 4466,26,400Total Value of Immovable Asset (Land & Building) 4317395,62,999 3710478,04,217 3339430,23,795 2968382,43,373Valuation of Movable AssetInventory Held at Central Project Store at Service Zone Area 3097,24,453 3097,24,453 2787,52,008 2477,79,563Closing Stock Food & Beverage Located at Town Plaza Operation Store as on 22.4.2017 152,43,393 152,43,393 137,19,053 121,94,714Summary of Movable Assets held within the Aamby Valley City 25450,79,065 25450,79,065 22905,71,158 20360,63,252Total Value of Movable Asset 28700,46,910 28700,46,910 25830,42,219 22960,37,528Total Value of Asset (Movable & Immovable) 4346096,09,909 3739178,51,127 3365260,66,014 2991342,80,902OR SAY 43,461 Crores 37,392 Crores 33,653 Crores 29,913 CroresRemark:- For Land Within Aamby Valley City:- Average Govt ready recknor rate is 53612.50 Rs Per Sq Meter. But inthe present market scenario for real estate market specially after Demonetisation, availability of buyer at this price arevery rare. So it require discounting hence We are considering 15% discounting factor from Govt ready recknor rate toarrive at the fair market value of this land.⬠\235CP 412/2012 5It is submitted by Mr. Vinod Sharma that this Court mayfix a reserve fair price and instruct to proceed with theformalities of auction by preparing the draft terms andconditions and other formalities. At this juncture, Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counselappearing for the contemnor, Subrata Roy Sahara, who is alsopresent in pursuance of our earlier order, has filed anaffidavit of undertaking. The relevant part of the saidaffidavit of undertaking, duly signed by Mr. Subrata RoyShara, reads as follows :-⬠S 5. That towards the payment of theaforesaid first two instalments, being thefirst instalment of Rs.1500 Crores and thesecond instalment of Rs.552.21 Crores, thedeponent is submitting two post datedcheque, being the cheque no.283549 dated15.06.2017 drawn on Punjab National Bank,Mahanagar Branch, Lucknow for an amount ofRs.15,00,00,00,000/- (Rupees fifteen HundredCrores only) and cheque no.283550 dated15.07.2017 drawn on Punjab National Bank,Mahanagar Branch, Lucknow for an amount ofRs.552,21,00,000/- (Rs. Five Hudnred FiftyTwo Crores Twenty two lakh only) both drawnin favour of SEBI Shara Refund AccountNo.012210110003740.6. That the deponent submits and assuresto this Hon'ble Court that the said chequewould be honoured and encashed in allcircumstances, on presentation on the duedate, for which the deponent undertakes andassures to this Hon'ble Court.⬠\235We are not referring to the earlier paragraphs inasmuchas they contain assurance for the distant future. We areCP 412/2012 6
concerned with the present and not with the distant future asthat is not the duty of the Court in a contempt proceeding. At this juncture, it is submitted by Mr. Shekhar Naphade,learned Amicus Curiae and Mr. Arvind Datar, learned seniorcounsel appearing for the SEBI being assisted by Mr. PratapVanugopal, learned counsel that the contemnor, as on today,owes approximately Rs. 11,169 Crores towards the principaland that is required to be paid. As the affidavit wouldshow, the first cheque is for Rs.1500,00,00,000/- dated15.6.2017 and the second cheque is dated 15.7.2017 for a sumof Rs.552,21,00,000/-. The affidavit shows assurance to seeto it that the cheques shall be honoured in all circumstanceson presentation on the due date.On being asked, the contemnor submitted that it is hisobligation to see that the cheques are encashed failing whichhe may be sent to custody.At this juncture, Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counselsubmitted that the petitioner may be granted liberty to sendRs.1500,00,00,000/- (Rupees one thousand five hundred croresonly) in the accounts of SEBI Sahara Refund Account throughRTGS on or before 15.6.2017. Mr. Arvind Datar, learnedsenior counsel appearing for the SEBI submitted that he hasno objection. If the amount comes to the account byelectronic transaction, SEBI shall return the chequeCP 412/2012 7amounting to Rs.1500,00,00,000/- (Rupees one thousand fivehundred crore only).Regard being had to the submissions of the officialliquidator and the affidavit that has been filed by thecontemnor, we direct that the reserved price for the purposeof auction be fixed at Rs.37,392 Crores. The OfficialLiquidator shall proceed in accordance with the Rules ofprocedure and prepare a draft terms and conditions and salenotice and the same shall be filed for our approval on19.6.2017. The terms and conditions for the auction shall befinalised by Mr. Vinod Sharma, the Official Liquidator inconsultation with Mr. Justice B.N. Agarwal, formerly a Judgeof this Court. The official liquidator will be at liberty toavail the expertise of an expert for drafting the terms andconditions. The official liquidator shall remain personallypresent with his team, on the next date of hearing. List the matter at 10.30 a.m. on 19.6.2017. Be itclarified that the matter is directed to e listed on that dayto scrutinise the action/steps taken in pursuance of theorder passed today.The interim order shall remain in force till then.I.A. 247/2017In pursuance of our earlier order, Mr. Prakash Swami, theCP 412/2012 8power of attorney holder for M.G. Capital Holdings ispresent. The sum of Rs.10,00,00,000/- (Rupees ten croreonly) has not yet been deposited. In view of the aforesaid,he is in violation of the order passed by this Court. Havingheard his explanation which is not satisfactory, we hold himguilty of contempt of this Court and convict him accordingly.We have heard Mr. Prakash Swami, who is present in theCourt on sentence as well. He says that he is not a stakeholder or a partner and on the basis of personal friendship,he had filed the affidavit and that he is a retired personand has no source of income.Regard being had to the explanation offered, we think itappropriate to impose a simple imprisonment for a terms ofone month. The Police personnel present in Court aredirected to produce Mr. Prakash Swami before the concernedRegistrar of this Court, who shall issue a warrant so that hecan be put in Tihar Jail to serve the aforesaid sentence.(Gulshan Kumar Arora)
Court Master (H.S. Parasher)Court Master
ITEM NO.302 COURT NO.2 SECTION X S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS R.P.(Crl.) No.458/2014 In W.P.(Crl.) No.57/2014 SUBRATA ROY SAHARA Petitioner(s) VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND ORS Respondent(s) (With appln. (s) for application for hearing in open Court and office report) Date : 17/04/2017 This petition was circulated today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Nalin Kohli, Adv. Mr. A.K. Shrivastava, Adv. Ms. Sushma Manchanda, Adv. Mr. Prabhas Bajaj, Adv. Mr. Ankit Roy, Adv. Mr. B.K. Prasad, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List the matter at 2 p.m. on 27 th April, 2017. (Chetan Kumar) Court Master (H.S. Parasher) Court Master
CP 412/2012 1 ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. Nos.83-85/2015,104-106/2015, 131/2015, 158-160/2016, 180-182/2016, 190-191/2016, 194-195/2016, 205-207/2016, 208/2016, 209-210/2016, 211/2016,212-214/2016, 218-220/2016, 227/2016,231/2016, 232/2016, 239/2016, 240/2016, 241/2016, 242/2016, 243/2016 & 244-246/2016, 247/2017, 251-252, 253-255, 256, 257-259, 260-262/2017, 268-270/2017, 273-274/2017, 280-282/2017 & 284-286/2017 In CONMT.PET.(C) Nos.412 & 413/2012 In C.A. Nos.9813 & 9833/2011 And C.P.(C) No.260/2013 In C.A. No.8643/2012 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (For directions, impleadment and intervention, appropriate orders and provisional release and office report) Date: 17/04/2017 These applications were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI Mr. Shekhar Napahade, Sr. Adv. (A.C.) For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Purushottam Kumar Jha, Adv. Mr. Anuj Kumar Sarma, Adv. Ms. Niharika, Adv. Mr. Aman Shukla, Adv. Ms. Kanika Kalaiyarasan, Adv. for M/s. K. J. John & Co. For Respondent(s) Mr. Salman Khurshid, Sr. Adv. Mr. Narendra Hooda, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv.
CP 412/2012 2 Mr. Sarthak Nayak, Adv. Mr. Tushar Gupta, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Jain, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Ms. Neha Gupta, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv. Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Mr. Vivek K. Tankha, Sr. Adv. Mr. R.V. Prabhat, Adv. Mr. Sachin Pujari, Adv. Mr. Prashant Kumar, AOR Mr. Ramesh Babu M. R., AOR Ms. Swati Setia, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar, AOR Mr. Rakesh Kr. Sharma, AOR Mr. Amit Anand Tiwari, AOR Mr. Yash Pal Dhingra, AOR Mr. P.N. Puri, AOR Mr. Vishwajit Bhattacharya, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pawan Upadhyay, Adv. Mr. Sarvjit Pratap Singh, Adv. Ms. Sharmila Upadhyay, AOR Mr. C.K. Sasi, AOR Mr. Ratnakar Dash, Sr. Adv. Mr. G. Sivabalamurugan, AOR Ms. Vandana, Adv. Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AOR Mr. Rana Mukherjee, Sr. Adv. Mr. D.L. Chidananda, Adv. Ms. Sadhana Sandhu, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar, Adv. Mr. M.K. Maroria, Adv. Ms. Sushma Manchanda, Adv. Mr. Nalin Kohli, Adv. Mr. A.K. Srivastava, Adv. Mr. B.K. Prasad, AOR
CP 412/2012 3 Mr. Sriram Parakkat, Adv. Mr. Vishnu Shankar M.S., Adv. Mr. Vishnu Jain, Adv. Ms. Athira G. Nair, Adv. Mr. Ankur S. Kulkarni, AOR Mr. Anupam Lal Das, AOR Mr. Anish Maheshwari, Adv. Ms. Farha Malik, Adv. Mr. Prashant Choudhary, AOR Mr. Yunus Malik, Adv. Ms. Rajeeta Raj, Adv. Mr. Sanjeev Agarwal, AOR Ms. Meenakshi Arora, Sr. Adv. Mr. Mursh Jani, Adv. Ms. Monisha Handa, Adv. Mr. Mohit D. Ram, AOR Mr. B.S. Banthia, Adv. Mr. Sachin Daga, Adv. Ms. Vidhi Goel, Adv. Ms. B. Vijayalakshmi Menon, Adv. Mr. Balbir Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Rabin Majumder, Adv. Ms. Nishtha Sikroria, Adv. Ms. Rubal Maini, Adv. Mr. Basava Prabhu Patil, Sr. Adv. Mr. Rakesh U. Upadhyay, Adv. Ms. Aarti Upadhyay, Adv. Mr. B.A.S. Jadon, Adv. Mr. R. Basant, Sr. Adv. Mr. Amol N. Suryawanshi, Adv. Mr. Sunil Fernandes, Adv. Ms. Astha Sharma, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Heard Mr. Sriram Parakkat, learned counsel, who had filed I.A. No.247 of 2017, giving a proposal that MG Capital
CP 412/2012 4 Holdings LLC, New York, USA, shall purchase the Hotel Plaza by giving 550 million US dollars and to show its bona fide, had agreed to deposit Rs.750 crores with SEBI Sahara Refund Account, but that has not been done. It is submitted by Mr. Sriram that after due diligence, the Company has found that there is difficulty to go with the transaction. The said interlocutory application has been filed by the Power of Attorney Holder, Dr. Prakash Swamy, who is the deponent to the application. As an affidavit of this nature was filed before this Court, we would like Mr. Rana Mukherjee, learned senior counsel appearing for the Union of India to intimate the Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India, so that Dr. Prakash Swamy does not leave India. The Union of India shall also issue a Red Corner Notice against Dr. Prakash Swamy in the course of the day. It is further directed that Dr. Prakash Swamy shall deposit a sum of Rs.10,00,00,000/- (Rupees ten crores only) in the SEBI Sahara Refund Account, which shall be forfeited towards costs. The amount of Rs.10,00,00,000/- should be deposited within ten days hence, failing which this Court may issue non-bailable warrants of arrest against Dr. Prakash Swamy. Dr. Prakash Swamy, who belongs to Chennai, shall deposit his passport before the Regional Passport Officer, Chennai, Sastri Bhawan, by tomorrow i.e. 18 th April, 2017. Mr. Sriram Parakkat, learned counsel shall hand over the address and the passport number of Dr. Prakash Swamy to Mr. Rana Mukherjee, learned senior counsel in the course of the day. Let a copy of the order be handed over to Ms. Sadhana Sandhu, learned counsel assisting Mr. Rana Mukherjee, so that he can do the needful in the matter.
CP 412/2012 5 As no amount has been deposited by the contemnor, we are inclined to go ahead with auction for the Aamby Valley City near Lonavala, Maharashtra. It is submitted by Mr. Shekhar Naphade, learned Amicus Curiae assisting the Court in the matter that the Official Liquidator of the Bombay High Court may be appointed to conduct the sale. Mr. Arvind P. Datar, learned senior counsel being assisted by Mr. Pratap Venugopal, learned counsel appearing for the SEBI shall provide the necessary details of the said property to the Official Liquidator, who with his team, shall make the valuation and proceed with the auction. Learned counsel appearing for the contemnor shall provide all the necessary details of the property also to the Official Liquidator within forty-eight hours. If the Official Liquidator requires some amount, which is reasonable, as agreed to by Mr. Datar, he can make a requisition for the same, and the same shall be paid from the SEBI Sahara Refund Account. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, learned counsel assisting Mr. Datar shall forward this order to the Official Liquidator of the Bombay High Court and also all the details that of the Aamby Valley City near Lonavala, as submitted by the contemnor to this Court, so that the Official Liquidator can verify from the contemnor and, thereafter, proceed in accordance with law. If the contemnor, as directed herein-above, gives the necessary details within forty-eight hours from the date of information, the Official Liquidator shall report to this Court directly. Let the matter be listed at 2 p.m. on 27 th April, 2017, on which day, the contemnor, Mr. Subrata Roy Sahara, shall remain personally present before this Court. Dr. Prakash Swamy, who has filed the affidavit in I.A. No.247 of 2017, shall also remain personally present at 2 p.m. on
CP 412/2012 6 27 th April, 2017 before this Court. The concerned Superintendent of Police of Chennai shall be informed to ensure the personal presence of Dr. Prakash Swamy. Mr. Rana Mukherjee, learned senior counsel undertakes to intimate the Superintendent of Police, Chennai. We are absolutely sure that the contemnor shall be guided by the affidavit that has been sworn and filed before this Court and not play truancy with the contents of the affidavit. He who plays truancy with the Majesty of Law, invites the wrath and, may, ultimately, has to suffer the peril. The Registry is directed to send a copy of this order to the Official Liquidator of the Bombay High Court. The Official Liquidator must complete the exercise of valuation within ten days and send a report to this Court. We are sure all shall work in harmony to comply with the directions passed by this Court keeping in view the mandate of Article 144 of the Constitution of India. The personal presence of the Vice-Chairman of the Ghaziabad Development Authority stands dispensed with. The interim order passed on the earlier occasion shall remain in force till 27 th April, 2017, as on that day, this Court may rethink of varying the interim order of bail and think of sending the contemnor to custody. List the matter at 2 p.m. on 27 th April, 2017. (Chetan Kumar) Court Master (H.S. Parasher) Court Master
ìITEM NO.302 COURT NO.2 SECTION X S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS R.P.(Crl.) No.458/2014 In W.P.(Crl.) No.57/2014SUBRATA ROY SAHARA Petitioner(s) VERSUSUNION OF INDIA AND ORS Respondent(s)(With appln. (s) for application for hearing in open Court andoffice report)Date : 17/04/2017 This petition was circulated today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOIHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRIFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Nalin Kohli, Adv.Mr. A.K. Shrivastava, Adv.Ms. Sushma Manchanda, Adv.Mr. Prabhas Bajaj, Adv.Mr. Ankit Roy, Adv.Mr. B.K. Prasad, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RList the matter at 2 p.m. on 27 th April, 2017.(Chetan Kumar)Court Master (H.S. Parasher)Court Master
úLCP 412/20121ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSI.A. Nos.83-85/2015,104-106/2015, 131/2015, 158-160/2016,180-182/2016, 190-191/2016, 194-195/2016, 205-207/2016, 208/2016,209-210/2016, 211/2016,212-214/2016, 218-220/2016,227/2016,231/2016, 232/2016, 239/2016, 240/2016, 241/2016, 242/2016, 243/2016 & 244-246/2016, 247/2017, 251-252, 253-255,256, 257-259, 260-262/2017, 268-270/2017, 273-274/2017,280-282/2017 & 284-286/2017 In CONMT.PET.(C) Nos.412 & 413/2012 In C.A. Nos.9813 & 9833/2011AndC.P.(C) No.260/2013 In C.A. No.8643/2012S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(For directions, impleadment and intervention, appropriate ordersand provisional release and office report)Date: 17/04/2017 These applications were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI Mr. Shekhar Napahade, Sr. Adv. (A.C.)For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv.Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv.Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv.Mr. Purushottam Kumar Jha, Adv.Mr. Anuj Kumar Sarma, Adv.Ms. Niharika, Adv.Mr. Aman Shukla, Adv.Ms. Kanika Kalaiyarasan, Adv. for M/s. K. J. John & Co. For Respondent(s) Mr. Salman Khurshid, Sr. Adv.Mr. Narendra Hooda, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AORMr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv.Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv.CP 412/20122Mr. Sarthak Nayak, Adv.Mr. Tushar Gupta, Adv.Mr. Nikhil Jain, Adv.Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv.Ms. Neha Gupta, Adv.Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv.Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav, Adv.Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv.Mr. Vivek K. Tankha, Sr. Adv.Mr. R.V. Prabhat, Adv.Mr. Sachin Pujari, Adv. Mr. Prashant Kumar, AOR Mr. Ramesh Babu M. R., AORMs. Swati Setia, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar, AOR Mr. Rakesh Kr. Sharma, AOR Mr. Amit Anand Tiwari, AOR Mr. Yash Pal Dhingra, AOR Mr. P.N. Puri, AORMr. Vishwajit Bhattacharya, Sr. Adv.Mr. Pawan Upadhyay, Adv.Mr. Sarvjit Pratap Singh, Adv. Ms. Sharmila Upadhyay, AOR Mr. C.K. Sasi, AOR
Mr. Ratnakar Dash, Sr. Adv. Mr. G. Sivabalamurugan, AORMs. Vandana, Adv. Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AORMr. Rana Mukherjee, Sr. Adv.Mr. D.L. Chidananda, Adv.Ms. Sadhana Sandhu, Adv.Mrs. Anil Katiyar, Adv.Mr. M.K. Maroria, Adv.Ms. Sushma Manchanda, Adv.Mr. Nalin Kohli, Adv.Mr. A.K. Srivastava, Adv.Mr. B.K. Prasad, AORCP 412/20123Mr. Sriram Parakkat, Adv.Mr. Vishnu Shankar M.S., Adv.Mr. Vishnu Jain, Adv.Ms. Athira G. Nair, Adv.Mr. Ankur S. Kulkarni, AORMr. Anupam Lal Das, AORMr. Anish Maheshwari, Adv.Ms. Farha Malik, Adv.Mr. Prashant Choudhary, AORMr. Yunus Malik, Adv.Ms. Rajeeta Raj, Adv.Mr. Sanjeev Agarwal, AORMs. Meenakshi Arora, Sr. Adv.Mr. Mursh Jani, Adv.Ms. Monisha Handa, Adv.Mr. Mohit D. Ram, AORMr. B.S. Banthia, Adv.Mr. Sachin Daga, Adv.Ms. Vidhi Goel, Adv.Ms. B. Vijayalakshmi Menon, Adv.Mr. Balbir Singh, Sr. Adv.Mr. Rabin Majumder, Adv.Ms. Nishtha Sikroria, Adv.Ms. Rubal Maini, Adv.Mr. Basava Prabhu Patil, Sr. Adv.Mr. Rakesh U. Upadhyay, Adv.Ms. Aarti Upadhyay, Adv.Mr. B.A.S. Jadon, Adv.Mr. R. Basant, Sr. Adv.Mr. Amol N. Suryawanshi, Adv.Mr. Sunil Fernandes, Adv.Ms. Astha Sharma, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RHeard Mr. Sriram Parakkat, learned counsel, who hadfiled I.A. No.247 of 2017, giving a proposal that MG CapitalCP 412/20124Holdings LLC, New York, USA, shall purchase the Hotel Plazaby giving 550 million US dollars and to show its bona fide,had agreed to deposit Rs.750 crores with SEBI Sahara RefundAccount, but that has not been done. It is submitted by Mr.Sriram that after due diligence, the Company has found thatthere is difficulty to go with the transaction. The said interlocutory application has been filed bythe Power of Attorney Holder, Dr. Prakash Swamy, who is thedeponent to the application. As an affidavit of this naturewas filed before this Court, we would like Mr. RanaMukherjee, learned senior counsel appearing for the Union ofIndia to intimate the Ministry of External Affairs,Government of India, so that Dr. Prakash Swamy does not leaveIndia. The Union of India shall also issue a Red Corner
Notice against Dr. Prakash Swamy in the course of the day. It is further directed that Dr. Prakash Swamy shalldeposit a sum of Rs.10,00,00,000/- (Rupees ten crores only)in the SEBI Sahara Refund Account, which shall be forfeitedtowards costs. The amount of Rs.10,00,00,000/- should bedeposited within ten days hence, failing which this Court mayissue non-bailable warrants of arrest against Dr. PrakashSwamy. Dr. Prakash Swamy, who belongs to Chennai, shalldeposit his passport before the Regional Passport Officer,Chennai, Sastri Bhawan, by tomorrow i.e. 18 th April, 2017.Mr. Sriram Parakkat, learned counsel shall hand over theaddress and the passport number of Dr. Prakash Swamy toMr. Rana Mukherjee, learned senior counsel in the course ofthe day. Let a copy of the order be handed over toMs. Sadhana Sandhu, learned counsel assisting Mr. RanaMukherjee, so that he can do the needful in the matter.CP 412/20125As no amount has been deposited by the contemnor, weare inclined to go ahead with auction for the Aamby ValleyCity near Lonavala, Maharashtra. It is submitted byMr. Shekhar Naphade, learned Amicus Curiae assisting theCourt in the matter that the Official Liquidator of theBombay High Court may be appointed to conduct the sale.Mr. Arvind P. Datar, learned senior counsel being assisted byMr. Pratap Venugopal, learned counsel appearing for the SEBIshall provide the necessary details of the said property tothe Official Liquidator, who with his team, shall make thevaluation and proceed with the auction. Learned counselappearing for the contemnor shall provide all the necessarydetails of the property also to the Official Liquidatorwithin forty-eight hours. If the Official Liquidator requiressome amount, which is reasonable, as agreed to by Mr. Datar,he can make a requisition for the same, and the same shall bepaid from the SEBI Sahara Refund Account. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, learned counsel assistingMr. Datar shall forward this order to the Official Liquidatorof the Bombay High Court and also all the details that of theAamby Valley City near Lonavala, as submitted by thecontemnor to this Court, so that the Official Liquidator canverify from the contemnor and, thereafter, proceed inaccordance with law. If the contemnor, as directedherein-above, gives the necessary details within forty-eighthours from the date of information, the Official Liquidatorshall report to this Court directly.Let the matter be listed at 2 p.m. on 27 th April,2017, on which day, the contemnor, Mr. Subrata Roy Sahara,shall remain personally present before this Court. Dr.Prakash Swamy, who has filed the affidavit in I.A. No.247 of2017, shall also remain personally present at 2 p.m. onCP 412/2012627 th April, 2017 before this Court. The concernedSuperintendent of Police of Chennai shall be informed toensure the personal presence of Dr. Prakash Swamy. Mr. RanaMukherjee, learned senior counsel undertakes to intimate theSuperintendent of Police, Chennai. We are absolutely sure that the contemnor shall beguided by the affidavit that has been sworn and filed beforethis Court and not play truancy with the contents of theaffidavit. He who plays truancy with the Majesty of Law,invites the wrath and, may, ultimately, has to suffer theperil.
The Registry is directed to send a copy of thisorder to the Official Liquidator of the Bombay High Court.The Official Liquidator must complete the exercise ofvaluation within ten days and send a report to this Court.We are sure all shall work in harmony to comply with thedirections passed by this Court keeping in view the mandateof Article 144 of the Constitution of India. The personal presence of the Vice-Chairman of theGhaziabad Development Authority stands dispensed with.The interim order passed on the earlier occasionshall remain in force till 27 th April, 2017, as on that day,this Court may rethink of varying the interim order of bailand think of sending the contemnor to custody.List the matter at 2 p.m. on 27 th April, 2017.(Chetan Kumar)Court Master (H.S. Parasher)Court Master
CP(C) 412/2012 1 ITEM NO.302 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. No.247/2017 IN CONMT.PET.(C) Nos.412 & 413/2012 In C.A. No.9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN. LTD.& ORS. Respondent(s) (With appln. (s) for impleadment as party respondent and office report and office report) Date : 21/03/2017 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI Mr. Shekhar Napahade, Sr. Adv. (A.C.) For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Anuj Sarma, Adv. Ms. Niharika, Adv. Ms. Kanika Kalaiyarasan, Adv. for M/s. K. J. John & Co. For Respondent(s) Mr. Sriram Parakkat, Adv. IA 247/2017 Mr. M.S. Vishnu Sankar, Adv. Ms. Athira G. Nair, Adv. Mr. Ankur S. Kulkarni, AOR Mr. Narender Hooda, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sanjiv Sen, Sr. Adv. Mr. Aviral Dhindsa, Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Jain, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv. Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav, Adv.
CP(C) 412/2012 2 Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Mr. Sarthak Nayak, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, AOR Ms. Monisha Handa, Adv. Mr. Mohit D. Ram, Adv. Mr. D.L. Chidananda, Adv. Ms. Sadhana Sandhu, Adv. Mr. A.K. Srivastava, Adv. Mr. B.K. Prasad, Adv. Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar, Adv. Mr. M.K. Maroria, Adv. Mr. Ratnakar Dash, Sr. Adv. Mr. G. Sivabalamurugan, Adv. Ms. Vandana, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R This Court vide order dated 28 th February, 2017, taking note of the submissions of Mr. Sriram Parakkat, learned counsel appearing for the applicant in I.A. No.247 of 2017, had directed as follows:- “ In a case of this nature, surprises are bound to spring up. Mr. Sriram P., learned counsel has submitted that he has instructions from an International Real Estate Company, namely, MG Capital Holdings LLC, which is prepared to purchase the Plaza Hotel at New York, U.S.A. The company intends to offer 550 million US dollars for the stake of “Sahara” in that hotel. However, he wanted that he may be permitted to do due diligence and that should be granted by the contemnor. Though the submission advanced by Mr. Sriram appears quite innocuous, it cannot be so perceived. Once he intends to get into the fray, a fiscal one, he must be financially prepared. The permission can only be granted if he deposits a sum of Rs.750 crores before the Registry of this Court on or before 17 th April, 2017. In addition, he may supply the details of the company to Mr. Narendra Hooda, learned senior counsel assisting Mr. Kapil Sibal so that the credentials of the company can be verified.”
CP(C) 412/2012 3 It is submitted by Mr. Sriram Parakkat, learned counsel that without the account number, the applicant is not in a position to transmit the amount. At this juncture, it is submitted by Mr. Pratap Venugopal, learned counsel assisting Mr. Arvind P. Datar, learned senior counsel appearing for the S.E.B.I. that the amount can be transmitted to the SEBI Sahara Refund Account, the particulars of which are as under:- “ SEBI Sahara Refund Account No.012210110003740 Bank of India Bandra – Kurla Complex Branch, Mumbai.” By virtue of the order passed today, the earlier order stands modified to the extent that the amount of Rs.750 crores (Rupees seven hundred fifty crores only) shall be deposited in the SEBI Sahara Refund Account, but the time fixed in the previous order i.e. 17 th April, 2017, remains undisturbed. Let the matter be listed at 2.00 p.m. at 17 th April, 2017, as directed on the previous occasion. (Chetan Kumar) Court Master (H.S. Parasher) Court Master
(#CP(C) 412/20121ITEM NO.302 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. No.247/2017 IN CONMT.PET.(C) Nos.412 & 413/2012 In C.A. No.9813/2011S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN. LTD.& ORS. Respondent(s)(With appln. (s) for impleadment as party respondent and officereport and office report)Date : 21/03/2017 This petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRIMr. Shekhar Napahade, Sr. Adv. (A.C.)For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv.Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv.Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv.Mr. Anuj Sarma, Adv.Ms. Niharika, Adv.Ms. Kanika Kalaiyarasan, Adv. for M/s. K. J. John & Co. For Respondent(s) Mr. Sriram Parakkat, Adv.IA 247/2017 Mr. M.S. Vishnu Sankar, Adv.Ms. Athira G. Nair, Adv. Mr. Ankur S. Kulkarni, AORMr. Narender Hooda, Sr. Adv.Mr. Sanjiv Sen, Sr. Adv.Mr. Aviral Dhindsa, Adv.Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv.Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv.Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv.Mr. Nikhil Jain, Adv.Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv.Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv.Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav, Adv.CP(C) 412/20122Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv.Mr. Sarthak Nayak, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, AORMs. Monisha Handa, Adv.Mr. Mohit D. Ram, Adv.Mr. D.L. Chidananda, Adv.Ms. Sadhana Sandhu, Adv.Mr. A.K. Srivastava, Adv.Mr. B.K. Prasad, Adv.Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv.Mrs. Anil Katiyar, Adv.Mr. M.K. Maroria, Adv.Mr. Ratnakar Dash, Sr. Adv.Mr. G. Sivabalamurugan, Adv.Ms. Vandana, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RThis Court vide order dated 28 th February, 2017,taking note of the submissions of Mr. Sriram Parakkat,learned counsel appearing for the applicant in I.A. No.247 of2017, had directed as follows:-⬠S In a case of this nature, surprises are bound tospring up. Mr. Sriram P., learned counsel has
submitted that he has instructions from anInternational Real Estate Company, namely, MGCapital Holdings LLC, which is prepared topurchase the Plaza Hotel at New York, U.S.A. Thecompany intends to offer 550 million US dollarsfor the stake of ⬠SSahara⬠\235 in that hotel.However, he wanted that he may be permitted to dodue diligence and that should be granted by thecontemnor. Though the submission advanced by Mr.Sriram appears quite innocuous, it cannot be soperceived. Once he intends to get into the fray,a fiscal one, he must be financially prepared.The permission can only be granted if he depositsa sum of Rs.750 crores before the Registry ofthis Court on or before 17 th April, 2017. Inaddition, he may supply the details of thecompany to Mr. Narendra Hooda, learned seniorcounsel assisting Mr. Kapil Sibal so that thecredentials of the company can be verified.⬠\235CP(C) 412/20123It is submitted by Mr. Sriram Parakkat, learnedcounsel that without the account number, the applicant is notin a position to transmit the amount. At this juncture, itis submitted by Mr. Pratap Venugopal, learned counselassisting Mr. Arvind P. Datar, learned senior counselappearing for the S.E.B.I. that the amount can be transmittedto the SEBI Sahara Refund Account, the particulars of whichare as under:-⬠S SEBI Sahara Refund Account No.012210110003740Bank of IndiaBandra ⬠Kurla Complex Branch,Mumbai.⬠\235By virtue of the order passed today, the earlierorder stands modified to the extent that the amount ofRs.750 crores (Rupees seven hundred fifty crores only) shallbe deposited in the SEBI Sahara Refund Account, but the timefixed in the previous order i.e. 17 th April, 2017, remainsundisturbed.Let the matter be listed at 2.00 p.m. at 17 th April,2017, as directed on the previous occasion.(Chetan Kumar)Court Master (H.S. Parasher)Court Master
ITEM NO.302 COURT NO.2 SECTION X S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS R.P.(Crl.) No.458/2014 In W.P.(Crl.) No.57/2014 SUBRATA ROY SAHARA Petitioner(s) VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND ORS Respondent(s) (With appln.(s) for hearing in open Court and office report) Date : 28/02/2017 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. A.K. Sanghi, Sr. Adv. Ms. Sushma Manchanda, Adv. Mr. Nalin Kohli, Adv. Mr. Ashok K. Srivastava, Adv. Mr. B.K. Prasad, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Let this matter be listed at 2.00 p.m. on 17 th April, 2017. (Chetan Kumar) Court Master (H.S. Parasher) Court Master
CP(C) 412 & 413/2012 1 ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. Nos.83-85/2015,104-106/2015, 131/2015, 158-160/2016, 180-182/2016, 190-191/2016, 194-195/2016, 205-207/2016, 208/2016, 209-210/2016, 211/2016,212-214/2016, 218-220/2016, 227/2016,231/2016, 232/2016, 239/2016, 240/2016, 241/2016, 242/2016, 243/2016 & 244-246/2016, 247/2016, 251-252, 253-255, 256, 257-259 & 260-262/2017 In CONMT.PET.(C) Nos.412 & 413/2012 In C.A. Nos.9813 & 9833/2011 And C.P.(C) No.260/2013 In C.A. No.8643/2012 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (For directions, impleadment and intervention, appropriate orders and provisional release and office report) Date: 28/02/2017 These applications were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI Mr. Shekhar Napahade, Sr. Adv. (A.C.) Mrs. Shubhanghi Tuli, Adv. Mr. Vikram Sobti, Adv. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Purushottam K. Jha, Adv. Mr. Anuj Sarma, Adv. Ms. Niharika, Adv. Mr. Aman Shukla, Adv. Ms. Kanika Kalaiyarasan, Adv. for M/s. K. J. John & Co. For Respondent(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Mr. Narendra Hooda, Sr. Adv.
CP(C) 412 & 413/2012 2 Mr. Sanjiv Sen, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR Mr. Gaurav Bhatia, Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Nijam Pasha, Adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Jain, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv. Mr. Tushar Gupta, Adv. Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Mr. Pramod Kumar Dubey, Adv. Mr. Aardri Bhalla, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, AOR Mr. Ramesh Babu M. R., AOR Ms. Swati Setia, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar, AOR Mr. Rakesh Kr. Sharma, AOR Mr. Amit Anand Tiwari, AOR Mr. Yash Pal Dhingra, AOR Mr. P.N. Puri, AOR Mr. Bishwajit Bhattacharya, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pawan Upadhyay, Adv. Mr. Sarvjit Pratap Singh, Adv. Ms. Sharmila Upadhyay, AOR Mr. Saiby Jose Kidangoor, Adv. Mr. C.K. Sasi, AOR Mr. G. Sivabalamurugan, AOR Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AOR Mr. Anand Daga, Adv. Mr. Rana Mukherjee, Sr. Adv. Mr. D.L. Chidananda, Adv. Mr. A.K. Srivastava, Adv. Ms. Sadhana Sandhu, Adv.
CP(C) 412 & 413/2012 3 Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar, Adv. Mr. M.K. Maroria, Adv. Mr. Manoj Singh, Adv. Mr. B.K. Prasad, AOR Mr. Sriram P., Adv. Mr. Vishnu Shankar M.S., Adv. Ms. Athira G. Nair, Adv. Mr. Ankur S. Kulkarni, AOR Mr. Anupam Lal Das, AOR Mr. Anish Maheshwari, Adv. Ms. Rajeeta Roy, Adv. Ms. Farha Malik, Adv. Mr. Prashant Choudhary, AOR Mr. Yunus Malik, Adv. Mr. Sanjeev Agarwal, AOR Ms. Meenakshi Arora, Sr. Adv. Ms. Monisha Handa, Adv. Mr. Mohit D. Ram, AOR Mr. Balbir Singh, Sr. Adv. Ms. Nishtha Sikronia, Adv. Mr. Rabin Majumdar, Adv. Ms. Vidhi Goel, Adv. Ms. B. Vijaylaksmi Menon, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R This Court on 6 th February, 2017, had directed the contemnor to file a list of properties that can be put to public auction. At that time, it was categorically mentioned that the properties should be free from any encumbrance. In pursuance of the said order, a list of properties has been filed which has been categorized as Part 'A' and Part 'B'. Part 'A' contains list of fifteen properties which are stated to be free from encumbrances and Part 'B', as is
CP(C) 412 & 413/2012 4 admitted, includes some of the properties which have been encumbered. As we had thought of putting the properties to auction, we think it appropriate to mention the list of properties contained in Part 'A'. It is as follows:- 1. Sahara Hospital, Lucknow 2. Sahara India Sadan Shakespear Sarani, Kolkatta 3. Land at Sohna Road, Gurgaon 4. Land at Najafgarh, Delhi 5. Sahara City Homes at Indore 6. Sahara City Homes at Lucknow 7. Sahara City Homes at Coimbatore 8. Sahara States, Bhopal 9. Sahara City Homes at Guna 10. Sahara City Homes, Land at Katni, M.P. 11. Sahara City Homes, Land at Haridwar, Uttaranchal 12. Sahara City Homes, Land at Pune, Maharashtra 13. Land & Building at Whiltefield, Bangalore 14. Stake in Orange India Holdings Sarl, Silverstone, London 15. Land at Ghaziabad As far as Item No.14 is concerned, it is actually a property having stake in a particular holding and, therefore, Mr. Arvind P. Datar, learned senior counsel appearing for the S.E.B.I. has submitted that being an immovable property it can never be put to auction and, therefore, that should be excluded.
CP(C) 412 & 413/2012 5 As far as Item No.15 is concerned, as the remarks column would reflect, it is a property in which compensation has been awarded in favour of the contemnor and the same has to be computed in accordance with the directions given in the award as per the order passed in S.L.P.(C) No.16609 of 2010. At this stage, we enquired from Mr. Datar, learned senior counsel, who is being assisted by Mr. Pratap Venugopal, learned counsel appearing for the S.E.B.I. as to how long will it take to conduct auction in respect of the rest of the properties. Mr. Datar has submitted that earlier on two agencies, namely, SBICAPS, a subsidiary of the State Bank of India and the HDFC Bank, were appointed by this Court to conduct the e-auction, but they could not really sell the properties by way of e-auction as far as some of the properties are concerned, that is, Item Nos.5 to 11. It is his further submission that it is difficult to conduct auction and fetch money and, therefore, the contemnor may be directed to sell the properties and deposit the money with S.E.B.I. Mr. Arvind P. Datar, learned senior counsel has submitted that the contemnor is at liberty to sell any property situate in Part 'B' or anywhere else, subject to that the consideration should not be less than 90% of the guideline value/circle rate. At this juncture, Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel appearing for the contemnors submitted that if the contemnor is allowed to sell the properties, as mentioned in Part 'A', he will be able to do it and for that purpose, he needs six months. Having deliberated at length, we are not inclined to grant six months' time. Be it stated, the learned senior counsel appearing for the contemnor has stated
CP(C) 412 & 413/2012 6 that the properties in Part 'A' are likely to fetch Rs.6715.34 crores. From the aforesaid amount, the compensation amount in respect of the land situate at Ghaziabad, U.P., that is, Rs.1112.70 crores and Rs.510.00 crores, the stake holding amount, have to be deducted. After deducting the same, the amount comes to Rs.5092.64 crores. Be it noted, we have been apprised By Mr. Ramesh Babu, learned counsel appearing for the Reserve Bank of India that it has filed a winding up petition against Sahara India Financial Corporation Limited and, therefore, the contemnor should not sell any property belonging to the said company. Having instructed by Mr. Narendra Hooda, learned senior counsel, Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel appearing for the contemnor has submitted that that they will not alienate any property belonging to that company. If any property that is encumbered by any statutory authority is sold, it will be the duty and obligation of the contemnor to make the public aware about it. In view of the aforesaid, we permit the contemnor to sell the properties mentioned in Part 'A' barring the property at Item No.15, and any other properties mentioned in Part 'B' and other properties which are not encumbered and deposit Rs.5092.64 crores on or before 13 th April, 2017. The amount shall be deposited in SEBI Sahara Refund Account. In case, the substantial amount is deposited, this Court may think of extending the time, otherwise appropriate direction shall be issued. At this stage, one aspect is required to be dealt with. As is evident from Part 'A', item No.15, the land at
CP(C) 412 & 413/2012 7 Ghaziabad admeasures 91.65 acres. We have been apprised at the Bar that the same has been acquired by the Ghaziabad Development Authority and the price, as stated in the Annexure, is Rs.1112.70 crores. It is submitted by the learned senior counsel for the contemnor that the same is payable to him along with interest. To appreciate the said submission, it is obligatory on the part of the Court to offer an opportunity of hearing to the Ghaziabad Development Authority. Let notice be issued to the said authority within a week hence. The requisites in that regard be filed by the petitioner, S.E.B.I., within three days from today. The competent authority of the Ghaziabad Development Authority shall bring the computation in regard to the compensation awarded and remain personally present on 17 th April, 2017 before this Court. The Registry is directed to send a copy of this order to the competent authority of the Ghaziabad Development Authority. In a case of this nature, surprises are bound to spring up. Mr. Sriram P., learned counsel has submitted that he has instructions from an International Real Estate Company, namely, MG Capital Holdings LLC, which is prepared to purchase the Plaza Hotel at New York, U.S.A. The company intends to offer 550 million US dollars for the stake of “Sahara” in that hotel. However, he wanted that he may be permitted to do due diligence and that should be granted by the contemnor. Though the submission advanced by Mr. Sriram appears quite innocuous, it cannot be so perceived. Once he intends to get into the fray, a fiscal one, he must be financially prepared. The permission can only be granted if he deposits a sum of Rs.750 crores before the Registry of this Court on or before 17 th April, 2017. In addition, he may
CP(C) 412 & 413/2012 8 supply the details of the company to Mr. Narendra Hooda, learned senior counsel assisting Mr. Kapil Sibal so that the credentials of the company can be verified. The interim order passed on the earlier occasion to continue till the next date of hearing. Let the matter be listed at 2.00 p.m. on 17 th April, 2017. (Chetan Kumar) Court Master (H.S. Parasher) Court Master
ÎITEM NO.302 COURT NO.2 SECTION X S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSR.P.(Crl.) No.458/2014 In W.P.(Crl.) No.57/2014SUBRATA ROY SAHARA Petitioner(s) VERSUSUNION OF INDIA AND ORS Respondent(s)(With appln.(s) for hearing in open Court and office report)Date : 28/02/2017 This petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRIFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. A.K. Sanghi, Sr. Adv.Ms. Sushma Manchanda, Adv.Mr. Nalin Kohli, Adv.Mr. Ashok K. Srivastava, Adv.Mr. B.K. Prasad, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RLet this matter be listed at 2.00 p.m. on 17 th April,2017.(Chetan Kumar)Court Master (H.S. Parasher)Court Master
H]CP(C) 412 & 413/20121ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSI.A. Nos.83-85/2015,104-106/2015, 131/2015, 158-160/2016,180-182/2016, 190-191/2016, 194-195/2016, 205-207/2016, 208/2016,209-210/2016, 211/2016,212-214/2016, 218-220/2016,227/2016,231/2016, 232/2016, 239/2016, 240/2016, 241/2016, 242/2016, 243/2016 & 244-246/2016, 247/2016, 251-252, 253-255,256, 257-259 & 260-262/2017 In CONMT.PET.(C) Nos.412 & 413/2012 In C.A. Nos.9813 & 9833/2011AndC.P.(C) No.260/2013 In C.A. No.8643/2012S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(For directions, impleadment and intervention, appropriate ordersand provisional release and office report)Date: 28/02/2017 These applications were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI Mr. Shekhar Napahade, Sr. Adv. (A.C.)Mrs. Shubhanghi Tuli, Adv.Mr. Vikram Sobti, Adv.For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv.Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv.Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv.Mr. Purushottam K. Jha, Adv.Mr. Anuj Sarma, Adv.Ms. Niharika, Adv.Mr. Aman Shukla, Adv.Ms. Kanika Kalaiyarasan, Adv. for M/s. K. J. John & Co. For Respondent(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv.Mr. Narendra Hooda, Sr. Adv.CP(C) 412 & 413/20122Mr. Sanjiv Sen, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AORMr. Gaurav Bhatia, Adv.Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv.Mr. Nijam Pasha, Adv.Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv.Mr. Nikhil Jain, Adv.Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv.Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv.Mr. Tushar Gupta, Adv.Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav, Adv.Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv.Mr. Pramod Kumar Dubey, Adv.Mr. Aardri Bhalla, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, AOR Mr. Ramesh Babu M. R., AORMs. Swati Setia, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar, AOR Mr. Rakesh Kr. Sharma, AOR Mr. Amit Anand Tiwari, AOR Mr. Yash Pal Dhingra, AOR Mr. P.N. Puri, AORMr. Bishwajit Bhattacharya, Sr. Adv.Mr. Pawan Upadhyay, Adv.Mr. Sarvjit Pratap Singh, Adv. Ms. Sharmila Upadhyay, AOR
Mr. Saiby Jose Kidangoor, Adv. Mr. C.K. Sasi, AOR Mr. G. Sivabalamurugan, AOR Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AORMr. Anand Daga, Adv.Mr. Rana Mukherjee, Sr. Adv.Mr. D.L. Chidananda, Adv.Mr. A.K. Srivastava, Adv.Ms. Sadhana Sandhu, Adv.CP(C) 412 & 413/20123Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv.Mrs. Anil Katiyar, Adv.Mr. M.K. Maroria, Adv.Mr. Manoj Singh, Adv.Mr. B.K. Prasad, AORMr. Sriram P., Adv.Mr. Vishnu Shankar M.S., Adv.Ms. Athira G. Nair, Adv.Mr. Ankur S. Kulkarni, AORMr. Anupam Lal Das, AORMr. Anish Maheshwari, Adv.Ms. Rajeeta Roy, Adv.Ms. Farha Malik, Adv.Mr. Prashant Choudhary, AORMr. Yunus Malik, Adv.Mr. Sanjeev Agarwal, AORMs. Meenakshi Arora, Sr. Adv.Ms. Monisha Handa, Adv.Mr. Mohit D. Ram, AORMr. Balbir Singh, Sr. Adv.Ms. Nishtha Sikronia, Adv.Mr. Rabin Majumdar, Adv.Ms. Vidhi Goel, Adv.Ms. B. Vijaylaksmi Menon, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RThis Court on 6 th February, 2017, had directed thecontemnor to file a list of properties that can be put topublic auction. At that time, it was categorically mentionedthat the properties should be free from any encumbrance. In pursuance of the said order, a list of propertieshas been filed which has been categorized as Part 'A' andPart 'B'. Part 'A' contains list of fifteen properties whichare stated to be free from encumbrances and Part 'B', as isCP(C) 412 & 413/20124admitted, includes some of the properties which have beenencumbered. As we had thought of putting the properties toauction, we think it appropriate to mention the list ofproperties contained in Part 'A'. It is as follows:- 1. Sahara Hospital, Lucknow2. Sahara India Sadan Shakespear Sarani, Kolkatta3. Land at Sohna Road, Gurgaon4. Land at Najafgarh, Delhi5. Sahara City Homes at Indore6. Sahara City Homes at Lucknow7. Sahara City Homes at Coimbatore8. Sahara States, Bhopal9. Sahara City Homes at Guna10. Sahara City Homes, Land at Katni, M.P.11. Sahara City Homes, Land at Haridwar, Uttaranchal12. Sahara City Homes, Land at Pune, Maharashtra13. Land & Building at Whiltefield, Bangalore14. Stake in Orange India Holdings Sarl, Silverstone,
London15. Land at GhaziabadAs far as Item No.14 is concerned, it is actually aproperty having stake in a particular holding and, therefore,Mr. Arvind P. Datar, learned senior counsel appearing for theS.E.B.I. has submitted that being an immovable property itcan never be put to auction and, therefore, that should beexcluded.CP(C) 412 & 413/20125As far as Item No.15 is concerned, as the remarkscolumn would reflect, it is a property in which compensationhas been awarded in favour of the contemnor and the same hasto be computed in accordance with the directions given in theaward as per the order passed in S.L.P.(C) No.16609 of 2010.At this stage, we enquired from Mr. Datar, learnedsenior counsel, who is being assisted by Mr. PratapVenugopal, learned counsel appearing for the S.E.B.I. as tohow long will it take to conduct auction in respect of therest of the properties. Mr. Datar has submitted that earlieron two agencies, namely, SBICAPS, a subsidiary of the StateBank of India and the HDFC Bank, were appointed by this Courtto conduct the e-auction, but they could not really sell theproperties by way of e-auction as far as some of theproperties are concerned, that is, Item Nos.5 to 11. It ishis further submission that it is difficult to conductauction and fetch money and, therefore, the contemnor may bedirected to sell the properties and deposit the money withS.E.B.I. Mr. Arvind P. Datar, learned senior counsel hassubmitted that the contemnor is at liberty to sell anyproperty situate in Part 'B' or anywhere else, subject tothat the consideration should not be less than 90% of theguideline value/circle rate. At this juncture, Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned seniorcounsel appearing for the contemnors submitted that if thecontemnor is allowed to sell the properties, as mentioned inPart 'A', he will be able to do it and for that purpose, heneeds six months. Having deliberated at length, we are notinclined to grant six months' time. Be it stated, thelearned senior counsel appearing for the contemnor has statedCP(C) 412 & 413/20126that the properties in Part 'A' are likely to fetchRs.6715.34 crores. From the aforesaid amount, thecompensation amount in respect of the land situate atGhaziabad, U.P., that is, Rs.1112.70 crores and Rs.510.00crores, the stake holding amount, have to be deducted. Afterdeducting the same, the amount comes to Rs.5092.64 crores.Be it noted, we have been apprised By Mr. RameshBabu, learned counsel appearing for the Reserve Bank of Indiathat it has filed a winding up petition against Sahara IndiaFinancial Corporation Limited and, therefore, the contemnorshould not sell any property belonging to the said company. Having instructed by Mr. Narendra Hooda, learnedsenior counsel, Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counselappearing for the contemnor has submitted that that they willnot alienate any property belonging to that company. If anyproperty that is encumbered by any statutory authority issold, it will be the duty and obligation of the contemnor tomake the public aware about it.In view of the aforesaid, we permit the contemnor tosell the properties mentioned in Part 'A' barring theproperty at Item No.15, and any other properties mentioned inPart 'B' and other properties which are not encumbered anddeposit Rs.5092.64 crores on or before 13 th April, 2017. Theamount shall be deposited in SEBI Sahara Refund Account. In
case, the substantial amount is deposited, this Court maythink of extending the time, otherwise appropriate directionshall be issued.At this stage, one aspect is required to be dealtwith. As is evident from Part 'A', item No.15, the land atCP(C) 412 & 413/20127Ghaziabad admeasures 91.65 acres. We have been apprised atthe Bar that the same has been acquired by the GhaziabadDevelopment Authority and the price, as stated in theAnnexure, is Rs.1112.70 crores. It is submitted by thelearned senior counsel for the contemnor that the same ispayable to him along with interest. To appreciate the said submission, it is obligatoryon the part of the Court to offer an opportunity of hearingto the Ghaziabad Development Authority. Let notice be issuedto the said authority within a week hence. The requisites inthat regard be filed by the petitioner, S.E.B.I., withinthree days from today. The competent authority of theGhaziabad Development Authority shall bring the computationin regard to the compensation awarded and remain personallypresent on 17 th April, 2017 before this Court. The Registryis directed to send a copy of this order to the competentauthority of the Ghaziabad Development Authority.In a case of this nature, surprises are bound tospring up. Mr. Sriram P., learned counsel has submittedthat he has instructions from an International Real EstateCompany, namely, MG Capital Holdings LLC, which is preparedto purchase the Plaza Hotel at New York, U.S.A. The companyintends to offer 550 million US dollars for the stake of⬠SSahara⬠\235 in that hotel. However, he wanted that he may bepermitted to do due diligence and that should be granted bythe contemnor. Though the submission advanced by Mr. Sriramappears quite innocuous, it cannot be so perceived. Once heintends to get into the fray, a fiscal one, he must befinancially prepared. The permission can only be granted ifhe deposits a sum of Rs.750 crores before the Registry ofthis Court on or before 17 th April, 2017. In addition, he mayCP(C) 412 & 413/20128supply the details of the company to Mr. Narendra Hooda,learned senior counsel assisting Mr. Kapil Sibal so that thecredentials of the company can be verified.The interim order passed on the earlier occasion tocontinue till the next date of hearing.Let the matter be listed at 2.00 p.m. on 17 th April,2017.(Chetan Kumar)Court Master (H.S. Parasher)Court Master
ITEM NO.304 COURT NO.2 SECTION X S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS R.P.(Crl.) No.458/2014 In W.P.(Crl.) No.57/2014 SUBRATA ROY SAHARA Petitioner(s) VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND ORS Respondent(s) (With appln.(s) for hearing in open court and office report) Date : 06/02/2017 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List the matter at 2.00 p.m. on 27 th February, 2017. (Chetan Kumar) Court Master (Shakti Parkash Sharma) Court Master
CP(C) 412/2012 1 ITEM NO.303 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. Nos.83-85/2015,104-106/2015, 131/2015, 158-160/2016, 180-182/2016, 190-191/2016, 194-195/2016, 205-207/2016, 208/2016, 209-210/2016, 211/2016,212-214/2016, 218-220/2016, 227/2016,231/2016, 232/2016, 239/2016, 240/2016, 241/2016, 242/2016, 243/2016 & 244-246/2016, 247/2016, 251-252, 253-255, 256, 257-259 & 260-262/2017 In CONMT.PET.(C) Nos.412 & 413/2012 In C.A. Nos.9813 & 9833/2011 And C.P.(C) No.260/2013 In C.A. No.8643/2012 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (For directions, impleadment and intervention, appropriate orders and provisional release and office report) Date: 06/02/2017 These applications were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI Mr. Shekhar Napahade, Sr. Adv. (A.C.) Ms. Shubhangi Tuli, Adv. Mr. Vikram Sobti, Adv. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Sr. Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Anuj Sarma, Adv. Mr. Debarshi Bhuyan, Adv. Ms. Niharika, Adv. Mr. Aman Shukla, Adv. Ms. Kanika Kalaiyarasan, Adv. for M/s. K. J. John & Co. For Respondent(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Mr. Narendra Hooda, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sanjiv Sen, Sr. Adv.
CP(C) 412/2012 2 Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR Mr. G. Bhatia, Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Nijam Pasha, Adv. Mr. Aarohi Bhalla, Adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Jain, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv. Mr. Tushar Gupta, Adv. Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Mr. Sarthak Nayak, Adv. Ms. Nida Doon, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, AOR Mr. Parag P. Tripathi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Ramesh Babu M. R., AOR Ms. Swati Setia, Adv. Mr. Rana Mukherjee, Sr. Adv. Mr. D.L. Chidanand, Adv. Ms. Sadhna Sandhu, Adv. Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv. Mr. M.K. Maroria, Adv. Mr. P.K. Gautam, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar, AOR Mr. Rakesh Kr. Sharma, AOR Mr. Amit Anand Tiwari, AOR Mr. Yash Pal Dhingra, AOR Mr. P.N. Puri, AOR Ms. Sharmila Upadhyay, AOR Mr. Saiby Jose Kidangoor, Adv. Mr. C.K. Sasi, AOR Mr. G. Sivabalamurugan, AOR Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AOR Mr. Anand Daga, Adv. Mr. Maninder Singh, ASG Mr. D.L. Chidananda, Adv. Mr. A.K. Srivastava, Adv. Ms. Sushma Manchanda, Adv.
CP(C) 412/2012 3 Mr. Manoj Singh, Adv. Mr. B.K. Prasad, AOR Mr. Ankur S. Kulkarni, AOR Mr. Anupam Lal Das, AOR Mr. Anish Maheshwari, Adv. Ms. Farha Malik, Adv. Ms. Rajeeta Raj, Adv. Mr. Prashant Choudhary, AOR Mr. Yunus Malik, Adv. Mr. Sanjeev Agarwal, AOR Ms. Meenakshi Arora, Sr. Adv. Mr. Hursh Jani, Adv. Ms. Monisha Handa, Adv. Mr. Mohit D. Ram, AOR Mr. Balbir Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Rabin Majumder, Adv. Mr. Sandeep Bajaj, Adv. Mr. Aditya Chopra, Adv. Ms. Nishtha, Adv. Mr. Jayant Bhushan, Sr. Adv. Ms. Vidhi Goel, Adv. Ms. Shagun, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R On 12 th January, 2017, this Court, after referring to the earlier order dated 28 th November, 2016, dismissed the application for extension of time to deposit Rs.600 crores. Be it noted, on that day, it was submitted by Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel appearing for the contemnors that they may be permitted to transfer thirty-five million pounds equivalent to Rs.285 crores (Rupees two hundred eighty-five crores only) lying in Saharas account in London bank. After hearing Mr. Arvind P. Datar, learned senior counsel for the SEBI and Mr. Rana Mukherjee, learned senior counsel appearing for the Union of India, this Court granted
CP(C) 412/2012 4 the permission. In pursuance of the aforesaid order, Rs.295 crores (Rupees two hundred ninety-five crores only) has been transferred which is equivalent to thirty-five million pounds. Today, Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel being assisted by Mr. Gautam Awasthi, learned counsel for the contemnors, has handed over ten bank drafts amounting to Rs.2,862,750,000/- to Mr. Pratap Venugopal, learned counsel appearing for the SEBI. That apart, two deposit slips have also been handed over to the learned counsel for the SEBI. In essence, the order passed on 28 th November, 2016, stands complied with. The question that emerges for consideration is with regard to payment of entire principal sum. The issue of amount of interest shall be adverted to after deposit of the principal amount. Mr. Sibal, learned senior counsel has given a road map stating, inter alia , that the principal amount shall be cleared by end of July, 2019. It is apt to note here that the learned counsel appearing for the SEBI has filed an application for attachment of properties of the contemnors. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, as advised at present, we direct that the contemnors shall file a list of properties that can be put to public auction. Needless to emphasize that the properties suggested for public auction shall be free from any encumbrance. Needless to say, “any encumbrance” means it shall not be encumbered in any manner whatsoever. The said list be positively filed on or before 27 th February, 2017, after giving a copy to the learned counsel for SEBI and Mr. Shekhar Naphade, learned Amicus Curiae. A copy of the same shall also be handed over
CP(C) 412/2012 5 to Mr. Maninder Singh, learned Additional Solicitor General and Mr. Rana Mukherjee, learned senior counsel appearing for the Union of India. At this stage, it is obligatory to note, as submitted by Mr. Pratap Venugopal, learned counsel appearing for SEBI, which has been echoed in similar voice by Mr. Naphade, learned Amicus Curiae, that the contemnors who own a property situate at Aamby Valley City, Pune, Maharashtra, would be sufficient for realization of the whole amount. Mr. Venugopal, insisted that the property should be attached so that the contemnors shall make all endeavour to deposit the amount with SEBI. The said submission is seriously opposed by Mr. Sibal, learned senior counsel for the contemnors. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we are of the convinced opinion that the property situated at Aamby Valley City, Pune, should be attached and, accordingly, it is so ordered. The interim arrangement shall remain in force till the next date of hearing. Let the matter be listed at 2.00 p.m. on 27 th February, 2017. All the interlocutory applications shall be considered after the said date. (Chetan Kumar) Court Master (Shakti Parkash Sharma) Court Master
ÚITEM NO.304 COURT NO.2 SECTION X S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS R.P.(Crl.) No.458/2014 In W.P.(Crl.) No.57/2014 SUBRATA ROY SAHARA Petitioner(s) VERSUSUNION OF INDIA AND ORS Respondent(s)(With appln.(s) for hearing in open court and office report)Date : 06/02/2017 This petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRIFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RList the matter at 2.00 p.m. on 27 th February, 2017.(Chetan Kumar)Court Master (Shakti Parkash Sharma)Court Master
<CP(C) 412/20121ITEM NO.303 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSI.A. Nos.83-85/2015,104-106/2015, 131/2015, 158-160/2016,180-182/2016, 190-191/2016, 194-195/2016, 205-207/2016, 208/2016,209-210/2016, 211/2016,212-214/2016, 218-220/2016,227/2016,231/2016, 232/2016, 239/2016, 240/2016, 241/2016, 242/2016, 243/2016 & 244-246/2016, 247/2016, 251-252, 253-255,256, 257-259 & 260-262/2017 In CONMT.PET.(C) Nos.412 & 413/2012 In C.A. Nos.9813 & 9833/2011AndC.P.(C) No.260/2013 In C.A. No.8643/2012S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(For directions, impleadment and intervention, appropriate ordersand provisional release and office report)Date: 06/02/2017 These applications were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI Mr. Shekhar Napahade, Sr. Adv. (A.C.)Ms. Shubhangi Tuli, Adv.Mr. Vikram Sobti, Adv.For Petitioner(s) Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Sr. Adv.Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv.Mr. Anuj Sarma, Adv.Mr. Debarshi Bhuyan, Adv.Ms. Niharika, Adv.Mr. Aman Shukla, Adv.Ms. Kanika Kalaiyarasan, Adv. for M/s. K. J. John & Co. For Respondent(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv.Mr. Narendra Hooda, Sr. Adv.Mr. Sanjiv Sen, Sr. Adv.CP(C) 412/20122 Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AORMr. G. Bhatia, Adv.Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv.Mr. Nijam Pasha, Adv.Mr. Aarohi Bhalla, Adv.Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv.Mr. Nikhil Jain, Adv.Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv.Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv.Mr. Tushar Gupta, Adv.Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav, Adv.Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv.Mr. Sarthak Nayak, Adv.Ms. Nida Doon, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, AORMr. Parag P. Tripathi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Ramesh Babu M. R., AORMs. Swati Setia, Adv.Mr. Rana Mukherjee, Sr. Adv.Mr. D.L. Chidanand, Adv.Ms. Sadhna Sandhu, Adv.Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv.Mr. M.K. Maroria, Adv.Mr. P.K. Gautam, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar, AOR Mr. Rakesh Kr. Sharma, AOR
Mr. Amit Anand Tiwari, AOR Mr. Yash Pal Dhingra, AOR Mr. P.N. Puri, AOR Ms. Sharmila Upadhyay, AORMr. Saiby Jose Kidangoor, Adv. Mr. C.K. Sasi, AOR Mr. G. Sivabalamurugan, AOR Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AORMr. Anand Daga, Adv.Mr. Maninder Singh, ASGMr. D.L. Chidananda, Adv.Mr. A.K. Srivastava, Adv.Ms. Sushma Manchanda, Adv.CP(C) 412/20123Mr. Manoj Singh, Adv.Mr. B.K. Prasad, AORMr. Ankur S. Kulkarni, AORMr. Anupam Lal Das, AORMr. Anish Maheshwari, Adv.Ms. Farha Malik, Adv.Ms. Rajeeta Raj, Adv.Mr. Prashant Choudhary, AORMr. Yunus Malik, Adv.Mr. Sanjeev Agarwal, AORMs. Meenakshi Arora, Sr. Adv.Mr. Hursh Jani, Adv.Ms. Monisha Handa, Adv.Mr. Mohit D. Ram, AORMr. Balbir Singh, Sr. Adv.Mr. Rabin Majumder, Adv.Mr. Sandeep Bajaj, Adv.Mr. Aditya Chopra, Adv.Ms. Nishtha, Adv.Mr. Jayant Bhushan, Sr. Adv.Ms. Vidhi Goel, Adv.Ms. Shagun, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E ROn 12 th January, 2017, this Court, after referring tothe earlier order dated 28 th November, 2016, dismissed theapplication for extension of time to deposit Rs.600 crores.Be it noted, on that day, it was submitted by Mr. KapilSibal, learned senior counsel appearing for the contemnorsthat they may be permitted to transfer thirty-five millionpounds equivalent to Rs.285 crores (Rupees two hundredeighty-five crores only) lying in Saharas account in Londonbank. After hearing Mr. Arvind P. Datar, learned seniorcounsel for the SEBI and Mr. Rana Mukherjee, learned seniorcounsel appearing for the Union of India, this Court grantedCP(C) 412/20124the permission. In pursuance of the aforesaid order, Rs.295crores (Rupees two hundred ninety-five crores only) has beentransferred which is equivalent to thirty-five millionpounds.Today, Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel beingassisted by Mr. Gautam Awasthi, learned counsel for thecontemnors, has handed over ten bank drafts amounting toRs.2,862,750,000/- to Mr. Pratap Venugopal, learned counselappearing for the SEBI. That apart, two deposit slips havealso been handed over to the learned counsel for the SEBI.In essence, the order passed on 28 th November, 2016, stands
complied with.The question that emerges for consideration is withregard to payment of entire principal sum. The issue ofamount of interest shall be adverted to after deposit of theprincipal amount. Mr. Sibal, learned senior counsel has givena road map stating, inter alia , that the principal amountshall be cleared by end of July, 2019. It is apt to note here that the learned counselappearing for the SEBI has filed an application forattachment of properties of the contemnors.Having heard learned counsel for the parties, asadvised at present, we direct that the contemnors shall filea list of properties that can be put to public auction.Needless to emphasize that the properties suggested forpublic auction shall be free from any encumbrance. Needlessto say, ⬠Sany encumbrance⬠\235 means it shall not be encumbered inany manner whatsoever. The said list be positively filed onor before 27 th February, 2017, after giving a copy to thelearned counsel for SEBI and Mr. Shekhar Naphade, learnedAmicus Curiae. A copy of the same shall also be handed overCP(C) 412/20125to Mr. Maninder Singh, learned Additional Solicitor Generaland Mr. Rana Mukherjee, learned senior counsel appearing forthe Union of India.At this stage, it is obligatory to note, assubmitted by Mr. Pratap Venugopal, learned counsel appearingfor SEBI, which has been echoed in similar voice byMr. Naphade, learned Amicus Curiae, that the contemnors whoown a property situate at Aamby Valley City, Pune,Maharashtra, would be sufficient for realization of the wholeamount. Mr. Venugopal, insisted that the property should beattached so that the contemnors shall make all endeavour todeposit the amount with SEBI. The said submission isseriously opposed by Mr. Sibal, learned senior counsel forthe contemnors.Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we areof the convinced opinion that the property situated at AambyValley City, Pune, should be attached and, accordingly, it isso ordered.The interim arrangement shall remain in force tillthe next date of hearing.Let the matter be listed at 2.00 p.m. on27 th February, 2017.All the interlocutory applications shall beconsidered after the said date.(Chetan Kumar)Court Master (Shakti Parkash Sharma)Court Master
ITEM NO.804 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IA Nos. 253-255 of 2017 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412-413/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 and 9833/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (for directions) Date : 03/02/2017 These applications were mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUD For Applicant(s) Ms. Sharmila Upadhyay, Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Post these interlocutory applications for consideration, along with other applications, which are stated to be listed for hearing on 06.02.2017. (Renuka Sadana) (Parveen Kumar) Assistant Registrar AR-cum-PS
zITEM NO.804 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSIA Nos. 253-255 of 2017 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412-413/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 and 9833/2011S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(for directions)Date : 03/02/2017 These applications were mentioned today.CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUDFor Applicant(s) Ms. Sharmila Upadhyay, Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RPost these interlocutory applications for consideration,along with other applications, which are stated to be listed forhearing on 06.02.2017. (Renuka Sadana) (Parveen Kumar)Assistant Registrar AR-cum-PS
ITEM NO.803 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412 & 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9813 & 9833/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (With office report) WITH CONMT.PET.(C) NO.260/2013 IN CA NO.8643/2012 Date : 31/01/2017 This petition was orally mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh, AOR Ms. Sujata Kurdukar, AOR For Respondent(s) M/s. K. J. John & Co. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R On being mentioned by Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel, the matter is taken on Board. List the matter on 6.2.2017 as the protection is valid till then. Registry is directed to list the matter before the Bench at 3.30 p.m. (Gulshan Kumar Arora) (H.S. Parasher) Court Master Court Master
îITEM NO.803 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412 & 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9813 & 9833/2011S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(With office report)WITHCONMT.PET.(C) NO.260/2013 IN CA NO.8643/2012Date : 31/01/2017 This petition was orally mentioned today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHIFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AORMr. Vishwa Pal Singh, AOR Ms. Sujata Kurdukar, AORFor Respondent(s) M/s. K. J. John & Co. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E ROn being mentioned by Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel,the matter is taken on Board.List the matter on 6.2.2017 as the protection is valid tillthen. Registry is directed to list the matter before the Bench at3.30 p.m.(Gulshan Kumar Arora) (H.S. Parasher) Court Master Court Master
CP(C) 412/2012 1 ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. Nos.248-250 of 2017 In CONMT. PET.(C) Nos.412/2012 & 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 and C.A.NO.9833/2011 And CONMT.PET.(C)NO.260/2013 IN C.A.NO.8643/2012 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (For directions and office report) Date: 12/01/2017 These applications were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI Mr. Shekhar Napahade, Sr. Adv. A.C. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Purushottam K. Jha, Adv. Ms. Niharika, Adv. Ms. Kanika Kalaiyarasan, Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co. For Respondent(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Mr. Narendra Huda, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AOR Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Nijam Pasha, Adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Jain, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv.
CP(C) 412/2012 2 Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv. Mr. Tushar Gupta, Adv. Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Mr. Rana Mukherjee, Sr. Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar, AOR Mr. D.L. Chidananda, Adv. Ms. Sadhana Sandhu, Adv. Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv. Mr. A.K. Srivastava, Adv. Mr. M.K. Maroria, Adv. Mr. B.K. Prasad, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, AOR Mr. Ramesh Babu M. R., AOR Ms. Manisha Singh, Adv. Ms. Swati Setia, Adv. Mr. Yash Pal Dhingra, AOR Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AOR Mr. Sriram Parakshat, Adv. Mr. Ankur Kulkarni, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R This is an application seeking modification of the order dated 28 th November, 2016, to the extent that it relates to the direction to deposit Rs.600 crores (Rupees six hundred crores only) by 6 th February, 2017. It is apt to note here that on 28 th November, 2016, with regard to the order which is sought to be modified, this Court had directed as follows:- “ In the circumstances, we direct that the interim arrangement made by our orders dated 06.05.2016 and 11.05.2016 shall continue till 06.02.2017 subject to the Saharas depositing in the Sahara SEBI Refund Account a further amount of Rs.600,00,00,000/- (Rupees six hundred crores only). Needless to say, in case the deposit is not made, the contemnors shall be committed to prison as before.”
CP(C) 412/2012 3 Having heard Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel appearing for the applicant-respondent and Mr. Arvind P. Datar, learned senior counsel along with Mr. Pratap Venugopal, learned counsel for the petitioner, Securities and Exchange Board of India (S.E.B.I.) and Mr. Shekhar Naphade, learned Amicus Curiae, we are not inclined to extend the time. Needless to say, what has been mentioned in the earlier order, that if the Sahara India Real Estate Corporation Ltd., does not deposit the amount, the contemnors shall be committed to prison as before, is reiterated. At this juncture, Mr. Sibal, learned senior counsel has submitted that permission was granted vide order dated dated 11 th July, 2016, to transfer twenty-four million pounds equivalent to Rs.200 crores lying in Saharas account in a London bank, which the Sahara wishes to transfer to SEBI in discharge of its liability and the said prayer was accepted as it was not contested by Mr. Datar, learned senior counsel for the SEBI. Referring to the said order, it is urged by Mr. Sibal that the contemnors may be permitted to transfer thirty-five million pounds equivalent to Rs.285 crores (Rupees two hundred eighty-five crores only) lying in Saharas account in London bank. On a query being made, Mr. Datar, learned senior counsel appearing for SEBI and Mr. Rana Mukherjee, learned senior counsel appearing for the Union of India respectively, have stated that they have no objection for transfer of the money in SEBI Sahara Refund Account. The permission is granted accordingly. The other directions remain undisturbed. The interlocutory application seeking modification of the order dated 28 th November, 2016, stands dismissed.
CP(C) 412/2012 4 Let other interlocutory applications forming the subject matter of I.A. Nos.247, 251 and 252 of 2017 be listed at 3.00 p.m. on 7 th February, 2017. (Chetan Kumar) Court Master (H.S. Parasher) Court Master
\214(CP(C) 412/20121ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSI.A. Nos.248-250 of 2017 In CONMT. PET.(C) Nos.412/2012 & 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 and C.A.NO.9833/2011 And CONMT.PET.(C)NO.260/2013 IN C.A.NO.8643/2012S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(For directions and office report)Date: 12/01/2017 These applications were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI Mr. Shekhar Napahade, Sr. Adv. A.C. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv.Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv.Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv.Mr. Purushottam K. Jha, Adv.Ms. Niharika, Adv.Ms. Kanika Kalaiyarasan, Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co. For Respondent(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv.Mr. Narendra Huda, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, AORMr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv.Mr. Nijam Pasha, Adv.Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv.Mr. Nikhil Jain, Adv.Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv.CP(C) 412/20122Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv.Mr. Tushar Gupta, Adv.Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav, Adv.Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv.Mr. Rana Mukherjee, Sr. Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar, AORMr. D.L. Chidananda, Adv.Ms. Sadhana Sandhu, Adv.Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv.Mr. A.K. Srivastava, Adv.Mr. M.K. Maroria, Adv. Mr. B.K. Prasad, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, AOR Mr. Ramesh Babu M. R., AORMs. Manisha Singh, Adv.Ms. Swati Setia, Adv. Mr. Yash Pal Dhingra, AOR Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AORMr. Sriram Parakshat, Adv.Mr. Ankur Kulkarni, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RThis is an application seeking modification of theorder dated 28 th November, 2016, to the extent that it relatesto the direction to deposit Rs.600 crores (Rupees six hundredcrores only) by 6 th February, 2017. It is apt to note here
that on 28 th November, 2016, with regard to the order which issought to be modified, this Court had directed as follows:-⬠S In the circumstances, we direct that the interimarrangement made by our orders dated 06.05.2016and 11.05.2016 shall continue till 06.02.2017subject to the Saharas depositing in the SaharaSEBI Refund Account a further amount ofRs.600,00,00,000/- (Rupees six hundred croresonly). Needless to say, in case the deposit isnot made, the contemnors shall be committed toprison as before.⬠\235CP(C) 412/20123Having heard Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counselappearing for the applicant-respondent and Mr. Arvind P.Datar, learned senior counsel along with Mr. PratapVenugopal, learned counsel for the petitioner, Securities andExchange Board of India (S.E.B.I.) and Mr. Shekhar Naphade,learned Amicus Curiae, we are not inclined to extend thetime. Needless to say, what has been mentioned in theearlier order, that if the Sahara India Real EstateCorporation Ltd., does not deposit the amount, the contemnorsshall be committed to prison as before, is reiterated.At this juncture, Mr. Sibal, learned senior counselhas submitted that permission was granted vide order dateddated 11 th July, 2016, to transfer twenty-four million poundsequivalent to Rs.200 crores lying in Saharas account in aLondon bank, which the Sahara wishes to transfer to SEBI indischarge of its liability and the said prayer was acceptedas it was not contested by Mr. Datar, learned senior counselfor the SEBI. Referring to the said order, it is urged byMr. Sibal that the contemnors may be permitted to transferthirty-five million pounds equivalent to Rs.285 crores(Rupees two hundred eighty-five crores only) lying in Saharasaccount in London bank. On a query being made, Mr. Datar,learned senior counsel appearing for SEBI and Mr. RanaMukherjee, learned senior counsel appearing for the Union ofIndia respectively, have stated that they have no objectionfor transfer of the money in SEBI Sahara Refund Account. Thepermission is granted accordingly. The other directionsremain undisturbed.The interlocutory application seeking modificationof the order dated 28 th November, 2016, stands dismissed.CP(C) 412/20124Let other interlocutory applications forming thesubject matter of I.A. Nos.247, 251 and 252 of 2017 be listedat 3.00 p.m. on 7 th February, 2017.(Chetan Kumar)Court Master (H.S. Parasher)Court Master
ITEM NO.801 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IA No......../2017 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 and 413/2012 In C.A. Nos. 9813/2011 and 9833 of 2011 AND Contempt Petition(C) No. 260/2013 in CA No. 8643/2012 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (for directions) Date : 06/01/2017 This application was mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUD For Applicant(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. for Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Post for consideration next week, as per roster. (Renuka Sadana) (Parveen Kumar) Assistant Registrar AR-cum-PS
4ITEM NO.801 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSIA No......../2017 inCONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 and 413/2012 In C.A. Nos. 9813/2011 and 9833 of 2011 ANDContempt Petition(C) No. 260/2013 in CA No. 8643/2012S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(for directions)Date : 06/01/2017 This application was mentioned today.CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUDFor Applicant(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. for Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RPost for consideration next week, as per roster. (Renuka Sadana) (Parveen Kumar)Assistant Registrar AR-cum-PS
ITEM NO.52 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. M V RAMESH Civil Appeal No(s). 9224-9225/2016 SAHARA GRACE CONSUMERS GRIEVANCE ASSOCIATION Appellant(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA COMMERCIAL CORPORATION LTD. Respondent(s) (with office report) Date : 01/12/2016 These appeals were called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Ms. Vandana Sehgal,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Service is deemed complete in respect of sole respondent as sole respondent is appellant in the connected Civil Appeal No.7152-53/2016. Viewed thus, the matter shall be processed for listing before the Hon'ble Court as per rules. (M V RAMESH) Registrar SB
SECTION XVII IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 92249225 OF 2016 Sahara Grace Consumers Greivance Association ...Appellant VERSUS Sahara India Commercial Corporation Ltd ...Respondent OFFICE REPORT The matters above mentioned were listed before the Hon'ble Court on 21 st November ,2016 along with connected matter Civil Appeal No. 71527153 of 2016 when the Court was pleased to pass the following order: “Let the matter be listed on a non-miscellaneous day in the third week of February, 2017 for final disposal. Pleadings shall be complete by that time. ” It is submitted that notice was issued to the sole respondent through registered A.D. Delivery report on postal authority website states that notice was not delivered to the sole respondent and it is returned back with no remarks. However the sole respondent in this matter is common with the appellant in the connected matter Civil Appeal Nos. 7152-7153 of 2016 and is represented by Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Advocate but he has not entered vakalatnama in this matter. The matters are listed before the Ld. Registrar Court with this office report. DATED THIS THE 30 th DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2016. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Copy to : Ms. Vanadana Sehgal, Advocate ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
ITEM NO.52 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. M V RAMESHCivil Appeal No(s). 9224-9225/2016SAHARA GRACE CONSUMERS GRIEVANCE ASSOCIATION Appellant(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA COMMERCIAL CORPORATION LTD. Respondent(s)(with office report)Date : 01/12/2016 These appeals were called on for hearing today.For Appellant(s) Ms. Vandana Sehgal,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RService is deemed complete in respect of sole respondent assole respondent is appellant in the connected Civil AppealNo.7152-53/2016. Viewed thus, the matter shall be processed forlisting before the Hon'ble Court as per rules. (M V RAMESH) RegistrarSB
ITEM NO.302 COURT NO.1 SECTION X S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS R.P.(Crl.) No. 458/2014 In W.P.(Crl.) No. 57/2014 SUBRATA ROY SAHARA Petitioner(s) VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND ORS Respondent(s) (with appln. For application for hearing in open court and office report) Date : 28/11/2016 This petition was circulated today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Maninder Singh, ASG Mr. Ashok Srivastava, Adv. Mr. B.K.Prasad, Adv. Ms. Sushma Manchanda, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Post on Monday i.e. 06.02.2017 at 2 P.M. (Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
1 ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A.Nos. 83-85/2015,104-106/2015, 131/2015, 158-160/2016, 180-182/2016, 188-189/2016, 190-191/2016, 194-195/2016, 205-207/2016, 208/2016, 209-210/2016, 211/2016, 218-220/2016 & 227/2016 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412 & 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9813 & 9833/2011 AND C.P. (C)NO.260/2013 IN C.A.NO.8643/2012 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (For directions, impleadment and intervention, appropriate orders and provisional release and office report) I.A. Nos. 231, 232, 239, 240, 241, 242 & 243 of 2016 (Application for impleadment) Date : 28/11/2016 These applications were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI M/s. Shekhar Naphade, Sr. Adv. (A.C.) MS. Shubhangi Tuli, Adv. Mr. Vikram Sobti, Adv. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P.Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Niharika, Adv. MS. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. AnujSarma, Adv. Ms. Kanika, Adv. M/s. K.J.John & CO. For Respondent(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. CP 412 & 413/12 Mr. Narendra Hooda, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Aarohi Bhalla, Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Nijam Pasha, Adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv.
2 Mr. Nikhil Jain, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Salim Inamdar, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv. Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Mr. Sarthak Nayak, Adv. Mr. Aviral Dhirendra, Adv. Income-Tax Deptt. Mr. Maninder Singh, ASG, Mr. Rana Mukherjee, Sr. Adv. Mr. D.L.Chidananda, Adv. Mr. Ashok Srivastava, Adv. MS. Sadhna Sandhu, Adv. Mr. M.K.Maroria, Adv. Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv. MS. Anil Katiyar, Adv. Mr. B.K.Prasad, Adv. I.A. No. 239 Dr. A.M.Singhvi, Sr. Adv. Ms. Meenaakshi Arora, Sr. Adv. Mr. Harsh Jani, Adv. Mr. Neeraj Kumar, Adv. Mr. Mohit D.Ram, Adv. I.A 188-189 Mr. Bishwajit Bhattacharya, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pawan Upadhayay, Adv. Mr. Ratik Sharma, Adv. Ms. Sharmila Upadhyay,Adv. I.A. 215/16 Mr. K.V.Viswanathan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pravin Bahadur, Adv. Mr Amit Agaarwal, Adv. Mr. Rajan Narain, Adv. I.A. 232/16 Mr. Yunus Malik, Adv. MS. Rajeeta Raj, Adv. Ms. Farha Malik, Adv. I.A.231/16 Mr. Anish Maheshwari, Adv. Ms. Saroj Bala, Adv. I.A 227/16 Mr. Anupam Lal Das, Adv. Mr. Sahil Monga, Adv. Mr. Anirudh Singh, Adv. I.A. 215/16 Mr. Pravin Bahadur, Adv. Mr. Amit Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Rajan Narain, Adv. I.A. 240,241,242 Ms. Vandana Sehgal, adv. Ms. Anand Daga, Adv.
3 RBI Mr. Ramesh Babu M.R., Adv. Ms. Swati Setia, Adv. Ms. Manisha Singh, Adv. Dr.Vivek Sharma, Adv. Mr. Yash Pal Dhingra,Adv. Mr. C. K. Sasi,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. Mr. G.Sivabalamurugan, Adv. Mr. P. N. Puri,Adv. Mr. Amit Anand Tiwari, Adv. Mr.Prashant Chaudhary, Adv. Mr. Sanjeev Agarwal, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior appearing for Saharas has today filed in the Court an I.A. offering to pay the amount recoverable from Saharas in terms of our previous orders as per a Payment Plan enclosed with I.A. as Annexure-1. Mr.Arvind Datar, learned senior counsel appearing for SEBI and Mr.Shekhar Naphade, learned Amicus Curiae seek time to respond to the same. They are free to file their objections to this I.A. within four weeks from today with an advance copy to the counsel opposite. Post I.A. No.... of 2016 on Monday i.e. 06.02.2017 at 2 P.M. Mr. Kapil Sibal, in the meantime, prays for continuance of the interim arrangement made by us by our Order dated 11.05.2016. He submits that he has on all previous occasions, when the said
4 arrangement was extended, complied with the directions of this Court regarding deposit of the stipulated amount. In the circumstances, we direct that the interim arrangement made by our Orders dated 06.05.016 and 11.05.2016 shall continue till 06.02.2017 subject to the Saharas depositing in the Sahara SEBI Refund Account a further amount of Rs. 600,00,00,000/- (Rupees Six hundred crores only). Needless to say, in case the deposit is not made, the contemnors shall be committed to prison as before. At this stage Mr. Sibal argues that since the money which the Saharas have to deposit has to be raised by selling immoveable assets and since this Court has imposed a restriction as to the consideration for which the properties can be sold namely 90% of the circle rate prescribed for such properties, the Saharas may not find purchasers if that condition remains operative. He submits that this Court could relax the condition to enable the Saharas to sell the properties at a price less than the circle rates. We are not for the present inclined to modify the direction already issued by us as to the rate at which the Saharas shall sell their properties. We, however, make it clear that in any given case, if there is a proposal to sell any item at a price less than 90% of the circle rate, the Saharas shall be free to apply for permission of the Court in which event this Court would pass appropriate orders after hearing learned counsel for SEBI. Mr. Arvind Datar, learned counsel for SEBI submits that the Saharas are permitted to sell the property situate at Bahriach. Applicant in I.A. Nos. 212-214 who happened to be the purchaser of the said property, according to Mr. Datar, had offered to deposit
5 the balance amount of Rs. 20,25,00,000/- towards the sale consideration with SEBI on or before 20.11.2016. He submits that the needful has not been done by the purchaser and that the Saharas ought to deposit the balance amount, if they have received the same or refrain from executing the sale deed. Mr. Sibal seeks time to verify the facts and to take necessary steps for ensuring deposit of the balance sale consideration in the SEBI account. He is given four weeks' time for the purpose. In case the sale deed has not been executed by the Saharas in favour of the purchaser of the Bahriach property, no sale deed shall be executed unless the deposit of the amount is ensured. I.A. No. 239 of 2016 : Issue notice to the learned counsel for SEBI and to Mr. Shekhar Naphade, learned Amicus who may file their objections within four weeks. I.A. No. 188-189 of 2016 : Learned counsel for the applicant seeks leave to withdraw I.A. Nos. 188-189. I.As. No.188-189 of 2016 are dismissed as withdrawn accordingly. I.As No. 240-243 of 2016 : Issue notice. Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel appearing for Saharas seeks time to file objections to I.As No. 240-243. Applicants shall also file a copy of the consumer complaint filed before the State Consumer Commission at Nagpur in the meantime.
6 I.A. No. 131 of 2016 : A report has been received from Hon'ble Mr. Justice B.N.Agrawal in terms of our Order dated 27.04.2016. Learned counsel for the parties shall be given a copy of the same who may respond before the next date of hearing. I.A. No. 215 of 2016 : Mr. K.V.Viswanathan, learned senior counsel for the applicant seeks leave to withdraw I.A.No. 215 of 2016 reserving liberty for the applicant to seek such other redress in appropriate proceedings as is permissible in accordance with law. I.A. No. 227 of 2016 : Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel for applicant prays for and is granted four weeks' time to file objections to I.A. No. 227 of 2016. Post on Monday i.e. 06.02.2017 at 2 P.M. (Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
\216ITEM NO.302 COURT NO.1 SECTION X S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSR.P.(Crl.) No. 458/2014 In W.P.(Crl.) No. 57/2014SUBRATA ROY SAHARA Petitioner(s) VERSUSUNION OF INDIA AND ORS Respondent(s)(with appln. For application for hearing in open court and office report)Date : 28/11/2016 This petition was circulated today.CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRIFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Maninder Singh, ASG Mr. Ashok Srivastava, Adv. Mr. B.K.Prasad, Adv. Ms. Sushma Manchanda, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Post on Monday i.e. 06.02.2017 at 2 P.M.(Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
úD1ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSI.A.Nos. 83-85/2015,104-106/2015, 131/2015, 158-160/2016,180-182/2016, 188-189/2016, 190-191/2016, 194-195/2016,205-207/2016, 208/2016, 209-210/2016, 211/2016, 218-220/2016 &227/2016 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412 & 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9813 &9833/2011 AND C.P. (C)NO.260/2013 IN C.A.NO.8643/2012S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(For directions, impleadment and intervention, appropriate ordersand provisional release and office report)I.A. Nos. 231, 232, 239, 240, 241, 242 & 243 of 2016(Application for impleadment) Date : 28/11/2016 These applications were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI M/s. Shekhar Naphade, Sr. Adv. (A.C.) MS. Shubhangi Tuli, Adv. Mr. Vikram Sobti, Adv.For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P.Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Niharika, Adv. MS. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. AnujSarma, Adv. Ms. Kanika, Adv. M/s. K.J.John & CO. For Respondent(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv.CP 412 & 413/12 Mr. Narendra Hooda, Sr. Adv.Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv.Mr. Aarohi Bhalla, Adv.Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv.Mr. Nijam Pasha, Adv.Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv.2Mr. Nikhil Jain, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv.Mr. Salim Inamdar, Adv.Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv.Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav, Adv.Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv.Mr. Sarthak Nayak, Adv.Mr. Aviral Dhirendra, Adv.Income-Tax Deptt. Mr. Maninder Singh, ASG,Mr. Rana Mukherjee, Sr. Adv.Mr. D.L.Chidananda, Adv.Mr. Ashok Srivastava, Adv.MS. Sadhna Sandhu, Adv.Mr. M.K.Maroria, Adv.Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv. MS. Anil Katiyar, Adv.Mr. B.K.Prasad, Adv.I.A. No. 239 Dr. A.M.Singhvi, Sr. Adv.Ms. Meenaakshi Arora, Sr. Adv.Mr. Harsh Jani, Adv.Mr. Neeraj Kumar, Adv.Mr. Mohit D.Ram, Adv.I.A 188-189 Mr. Bishwajit Bhattacharya, Sr. Adv.Mr. Pawan Upadhayay, Adv.Mr. Ratik Sharma, Adv.Ms. Sharmila Upadhyay,Adv.I.A. 215/16 Mr. K.V.Viswanathan, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Pravin Bahadur, Adv.Mr Amit Agaarwal, Adv.Mr. Rajan Narain, Adv. I.A. 232/16 Mr. Yunus Malik, Adv.MS. Rajeeta Raj, Adv.Ms. Farha Malik, Adv.I.A.231/16 Mr. Anish Maheshwari, Adv.Ms. Saroj Bala, Adv.I.A 227/16 Mr. Anupam Lal Das, Adv. Mr. Sahil Monga, Adv. Mr. Anirudh Singh, Adv.I.A. 215/16 Mr. Pravin Bahadur, Adv. Mr. Amit Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Rajan Narain, Adv.I.A. 240,241,242 Ms. Vandana Sehgal, adv. Ms. Anand Daga, Adv.3RBI Mr. Ramesh Babu M.R., Adv. Ms. Swati Setia, Adv. Ms. Manisha Singh, Adv. Dr.Vivek Sharma, Adv. Mr. Yash Pal Dhingra,Adv. Mr. C. K. Sasi,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. Mr. G.Sivabalamurugan, Adv. Mr. P. N. Puri,Adv. Mr. Amit Anand Tiwari, Adv. Mr.Prashant Chaudhary, Adv. Mr. Sanjeev Agarwal, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior appearing for Saharashas today filed in the Court an I.A. offering to pay the amountrecoverable from Saharas in terms of our previous orders as per aPayment Plan enclosed with I.A. as Annexure-1. Mr.Arvind Datar, learned senior counsel appearing for SEBIand Mr.Shekhar Naphade, learned Amicus Curiae seek time to respondto the same. They are free to file their objections to this I.A.within four weeks from today with an advance copy to the counselopposite.Post I.A. No.... of 2016 on Monday i.e. 06.02.2017 at 2 P.M.Mr. Kapil Sibal, in the meantime, prays for continuance of theinterim arrangement made by us by our Order dated 11.05.2016. Hesubmits that he has on all previous occasions, when the said4arrangement was extended, complied with the directions of thisCourt regarding deposit of the stipulated amount. In thecircumstances, we direct that the interim arrangement made by ourOrders dated 06.05.016 and 11.05.2016 shall continue till06.02.2017 subject to the Saharas depositing in the Sahara SEBIRefund Account a further amount of Rs. 600,00,00,000/- (Rupees Sixhundred crores only). Needless to say, in case the deposit is notmade, the contemnors shall be committed to prison as before.At this stage Mr. Sibal argues that since the money whichthe Saharas have to deposit has to be raised by selling immoveableassets and since this Court has imposed a restriction as to theconsideration for which the properties can be sold namely 90% ofthe circle rate prescribed for such properties, the Saharas may notfind purchasers if that condition remains operative. He submitsthat this Court could relax the condition to enable the Saharas tosell the properties at a price less than the circle rates. We arenot for the present inclined to modify the direction already issued
by us as to the rate at which the Saharas shall sell theirproperties. We, however, make it clear that in any given case, ifthere is a proposal to sell any item at a price less than 90% ofthe circle rate, the Saharas shall be free to apply for permissionof the Court in which event this Court would pass appropriateorders after hearing learned counsel for SEBI.Mr. Arvind Datar, learned counsel for SEBI submits that theSaharas are permitted to sell the property situate at Bahriach.Applicant in I.A. Nos. 212-214 who happened to be the purchaser ofthe said property, according to Mr. Datar, had offered to deposit5the balance amount of Rs. 20,25,00,000/- towards the saleconsideration with SEBI on or before 20.11.2016. He submits thatthe needful has not been done by the purchaser and that the Saharasought to deposit the balance amount, if they have received the sameor refrain from executing the sale deed. Mr. Sibal seeks time toverify the facts and to take necessary steps for ensuring depositof the balance sale consideration in the SEBI account. He is givenfour weeks' time for the purpose. In case the sale deed has notbeen executed by the Saharas in favour of the purchaser of theBahriach property, no sale deed shall be executed unless thedeposit of the amount is ensured.I.A. No. 239 of 2016 :Issue notice to the learned counsel for SEBI and to Mr.Shekhar Naphade, learned Amicus who may file their objectionswithin four weeks.I.A. No. 188-189 of 2016 :Learned counsel for the applicant seeks leave to withdrawI.A. Nos. 188-189. I.As. No.188-189 of 2016 are dismissed aswithdrawn accordingly.I.As No. 240-243 of 2016 :Issue notice.Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel appearing for Saharasseeks time to file objections to I.As No. 240-243. Applicantsshall also file a copy of the consumer complaint filed before theState Consumer Commission at Nagpur in the meantime.6I.A. No. 131 of 2016 :A report has been received from Hon'ble Mr. JusticeB.N.Agrawal in terms of our Order dated 27.04.2016. Learned counselfor the parties shall be given a copy of the same who may respondbefore the next date of hearing.I.A. No. 215 of 2016 :Mr. K.V.Viswanathan, learned senior counsel for the applicantseeks leave to withdraw I.A.No. 215 of 2016 reserving liberty forthe applicant to seek such other redress in appropriate proceedingsas is permissible in accordance with law.I.A. No. 227 of 2016 :Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel for applicant praysfor and is granted four weeks' time to file objections to I.A. No.227 of 2016.Post on Monday i.e. 06.02.2017 at 2 P.M.(Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
ITEM NO.801 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. No.239 of 2016 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (Application for impleadment) with I.A. No...... of 2016) (Application for directions) Date : 25/11/2016 This I.A. was mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUD For Petitioner(s) Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh,Adv. Ms. Sujata Kurdukar,Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. For Applicant: Ms. Meenakshi Arora, Sr. Adv. (Mentioned by) Mr. Mohit D.Ram, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. UPON being mentioned the Court made the following O R D E R Post I.A. No.239 of 2016 (Application for impleadment) and I.A. No.... of 2016 (Application for directions) on Monday i.e. 28.11.2016 along with C.P.(C) No. 412 & 413 of 2012. (Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
ITEM NO.801 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSI.A. No.239 of 2016 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No.9813/2011S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(Application for impleadment)with I.A. No...... of 2016)(Application for directions)Date : 25/11/2016 This I.A. was mentioned today.CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUDFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh,Adv. Ms. Sujata Kurdukar,Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. For Applicant: Ms. Meenakshi Arora, Sr. Adv. (Mentioned by) Mr. Mohit D.Ram, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. UPON being mentioned the Court made the following O R D E R Post I.A. No.239 of 2016 (Application for impleadment)and I.A. No.... of 2016 (Application for directions) on Monday i.e.28.11.2016 along with C.P.(C) No. 412 & 413 of 2012.(Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
ITEM NO.56+61 COURT NO.3 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Civil Appeal No(s). 7152-7153/2016 SAHARA INDIA COMMERCIAL CORPORATION LIMITED Appellant(s) VERSUS SAHARA GRACE CONSUMER GRIEVANCES ASSOCIATION Respondent(s) (with appln. (s) for permission to file additional documents and stay and office report) WITH C.A. Nos.9224-9225/2016 (With Office Report) Date : 21/11/2016 These appeals were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMITAVA ROY For Appellant(s) Mr. Pallav Shishodia, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, AOR Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Rohan Ahuja, Adv. Ms. Sonali Dhir, Adv. Ms. Anisha Mahajan, Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AOR Ms. Supriya Juneja, AOR Mr. Mishal Johari, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Let the matter be listed on a non-miscellaneous day in the third week of February, 2017 for final disposal. Pleadings shall be complete by that time. (Gulshan Kumar Arora) (H.S. Parasher) Court Master Court Master
SECTION XVII IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 71527153 OF 2016 with INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NOS. 34,56 and 78 OF 2016 (Application for permission to file additional documents ,Stay and permission to file additional documents and CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 92249225 OF 2016 Sahara India Commercial Corporation Ltd. Etc ...Appellants VERSUS Sahara Grace Consumer Greivances Association Etc. ...Respondents OFFICE REPORT CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 71527153 OF 2016 The matters above mentioned were listed before the Hon'ble Court on 19 th October,2016 when the Court was pleased to interalia pass the following order: “ ...Having heard Mr. Vikas Singh, learned senior counsel for the appellant and Mr. Rohan Thawani and Mr. Aditya Singla learned counsel for the respondents, it is directed that the appellant shall deposit a sum of Rs.3.50 crores before the Registry of this Court within eight weeks hence. The amount so deposited shall be kept in a short term fixed deposit in the UCO Bank, Supreme Court Compound, New Delhi, so that interest can be accrued on the same. Let the matter be set out for final hearing after ten weeks.” It is submitted that Ms. Vandan Sehgal and MS. Supriya Juneja has entered appearance on behalf of both the respondents. Counsel for the respondents in Civil Appeal No. 7153 of 2016 has also filed short reply. Counsel for the appellant has on 17.10.2016 deposited amount of Rs. 3.50 Crores in the Registry of this Hon'ble court in view of the above said orders which has been invested in FDR and bearing maturity till 23.01.2017. Service is complete. CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 92249225 OF 2016 The matters above mentioned were listed before the Hon'ble Court on 09 th September,2016 when the Court was pleased to pass the following order:
“ Delay condoned. Admit. Tag with Civil Appeal No.7152-7153 of 2016.” It is submitted that notice was issued to the sole respondent through registered A.D. Delivery report on postal authority website states that notice was returned without remarks. Service is incomplete. CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 7152-7153 and 9224-9225 OF 2016 The matters above mentioned were listed before the Hon'ble Court along with connected matters on 18 th November,2016 when the Court was pleased to interalia pass the following order: “ C.A. NO. 71527153 OF 2016 & C.A. Nos. 92249225/2016 List these matters on 21 st November, 2016.” The matters are listed before the Hon'ble Court with this office report. DATED THIS THE 19 th DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2016. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Copy to : Ms. Supriya Juneja, Advocate Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Advocate Ms. Vanadana Sehgal, Advocate ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
\200ITEM NO.56+61 COURT NO.3 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSCivil Appeal No(s). 7152-7153/2016SAHARA INDIA COMMERCIAL CORPORATION LIMITED Appellant(s) VERSUSSAHARA GRACE CONSUMER GRIEVANCES ASSOCIATION Respondent(s)(with appln. (s) for permission to file additional documents and stay and office report)WITHC.A. Nos.9224-9225/2016(With Office Report)Date : 21/11/2016 These appeals were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMITAVA ROYFor Appellant(s) Mr. Pallav Shishodia, Sr. Adv.Mr. Gautam Talukdar, AORMr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv.Mr. Rohan Ahuja, Adv.Ms. Sonali Dhir, Adv.Ms. Anisha Mahajan, Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AOR Ms. Supriya Juneja, AORMr. Mishal Johari, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RLet the matter be listed on a non-miscellaneous day in thethird week of February, 2017 for final disposal.Pleadings shall be complete by that time.(Gulshan Kumar Arora) (H.S. Parasher) Court Master Court Master
1 ITEM NO.302 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. Nos. 83-85 of 2015, 104-106 of 2015, 131 of 2015, 158-160 of 2016, 180-182 of 2016, 188-189 of 2016, 190-191 of 2016, 194-195 of 2016, 205-207 of 2016, 208 of 2016, 209-210 of 2016, 211 of 2016, 212-214 of 2016, 218-220 of 2016 and 227 of 2016 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412 and 413 of 2012 In C.A. No. 9813 and 9833/2011 and C.P. © No. 260 of 2013 in C.A. No. 8643 of 2012 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (with appln. (s) for directions, impleadment and intervention, appropriate orders and provisional release and office report) Date : 21/10/2016 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R.DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.SIKRI M/s. Shekhar Naphade, Sr. Adv. (A.C.) For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P.Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Niharika, Adv. M/s. K.J.John & CO. For Respondent(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. CP 412 & 413/12 Mr. Narendra Hooda, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Aarohi Bhalla, Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Nijam Pasha, Adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Jain, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Salim Inamdar, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv. Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Mr. Sarthak Nayak, Adv.
2 I.A. 232/16 Mr. Salman Khurshid, Sr. Adv. Mr. Yunus Malik, Adv. MS. Saroj Bala, Adv. Mr. Sanjeev Agarwal, Adv. I.As. 212-214/16 Mr. Nidesh Gupta, Sr. Adv. Mr. Soayib Qureshi, Adv. Mr. Rabin Majumdar, Adv. I.A 188-189 Mr. Bishwajit Bhattacharya, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pawan Upadhayay, Adv. Mr. Sarvjit Pratap Singh, Adv. Ms. Sharmila Upadhyay,Adv. I.A.231/16 Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Anish Maheshwari, Adv. Ms. Farha Malik, Adv. M/o Law & Justice Mr. Tushar Mehta, ASG, Mr. D.L.Chidananda, Adv. Ms. Sadhna Sandhu, Adv. Mr. M.K.Maroria, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar,Adv. I.A. 211/16 Mr. K.V.Viswanathan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Amit Singh Chadha, Sr. Adv. Mr. G.Umapathy, adv. Mr. S.Vasudevan, Adv. Mr. Vipin Nair, adv. Mr. P.B.Suresh, Adv. Mr. Aditya Singh, Adv. Mr. R. Mekhala, Adv. Mr. Rakesh K. Sharma,Adv. Mr. Abhay Pratap Singh, Adv. Mr. Prithu Garg, Adv. I.A 227/16 Mr. Anupam Lal Das, Adv. Mr. Sahil Monga, Adv. I.A. 215/16 Mr. Pravin Bahadur, Adv. Mr. Amit Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Rajan Narain, Adv. I.A. 209/10 Mr. Rahul Sharma, Adv. Mr. P.N.Puri, Adv. RBI Mr. Ramesh Babu M.R., Adv. Ms. Swati Setia, Adv. Mr. Yash Pal Dhingra,Adv. Mr. Amitabh Chaturvedi, Adv. Mr. Sumit Kumar Shukla, Adv.
3 Ms. Rakhi Ray, Adv. Mr. Niraj Sharma,Adv. Mr. C. K. Sasi,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Agrawal,Adv. Mr. G.Sivabalamurugan, Adv. Ms. Anagha S. Desai,Adv. Mr. Amit Anand Tiwari,Adv. Mr. P. N. Puri,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R I.As No. 188-189 of 2016 : Issue notice. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. accepts notice and shall file his objections to these I.As within four weeks. Additional affidavit be filed by Ms. Sharmila Upadhayay, Adv. setting out the details of the salary drawn by the applicant explaining the source of amount lying in the Bank. I.As No. 212-214 of 2016 : Mr. Arvind Datar, learned senior counsel has drawn our attention to the 18 th Status report filed by Justice B.N.Agrawal. From a reading whereof it appears that the sale property situated in Bahriach has since been cancelled. We are told by Mr. Arvind Datar that this property is now free to be sold by Saharas themselves. Mr. Nidesh Gupta, learned senior counsel seeks leave to withdraw these I.As. which are hereby dismissed as withdrawn.
4 Mr. Gupta has today handed over a bank draft for a sum of Rs. 4,05,00,000/- representing part of the sale consideration for Bahriach property which Saharas has agreed to sell to Mr. Gupta's client. He submits that the balance amount of Rs. 20,25,00,000/- shall be deposited in SEBI Sahara Account within a period of thirty days from today. That statement is recorded. I.A. No. 227 of 2016 : Issue notice to the counsel opposite. Objections to this I.A. shall be filed before the next date of hearing i.e. 28.11.2016. I.As. No. 218-220 of 2016 : Pursuant to our orders passed earlier, SEBI had offered for sale of seven properties situate at different locations in the country. Five of those properties situate at Ajmer, Vellore, Thiruchirapalli, Ujjain and Firozabad appear to have been attached by the Income-Tax authorities under the provisions of Income-Tax Act. Realising that the said properties had been attached, SEBI appear to have denied the sale certificates to the highest bidders and refunded the amount deposited by them. When the matter was reported to Justice B.N.Agrawal, His Lordship has recommended that the auction in regard to the attached properties recommended that the auction in regard to the attached properties may also be permitted under the orders of this Court in view of the fact that the Income-Tax Department does not oppose the auction but only lays a claim to the sale proceed thereof.
5 When the matter came up today before us, it was contended by Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel appearing for SEBI that while Ajmer property had fetched Rs.26.51,00,000/- the Saharas have received an offer of Rs. 41,00,00,000/- from one Shri Rajinder Daga which is substantially higher amount than the one at which the SEBI proposes to sell the said property. He submits that in regard to the other attached property also if a fresh sale is ordered, the same would fetch much higher the proposed amount than the one earlier recovered by SEBI. He urged that this Court could direct SEBI to re-auction the said properties on the condition that the higher amount offered for the same in the previous auction shall be taken as the reserve price for the said properties except in the case of property at Ajmer where the reserve price shall be treated to be Rs. 41,00,00,000/- offered by Shri Rajinder Daga. He submits that in order to ensure that only serious purchasers come forward, this Court could stipulate suitable conditions including one for deposit of forfeitable security so that in the event of any person making an offer and later backing out, the amount so furnished could be forfeited. Mr. Arvind Datar has no serious objection to the SEBI holding a second round of auction for the properties mentioned above on such conditions as may be stipulated by this Court. He urged that the amount so received could be initially deposited in the SEBI Sahara Account subject to such directions as to apportionment/appropriation whereof as this Court may direct at an appropriate stage keeping in view the claim made by the Income-Tax department over the same.
6 In the circumstances, therefore, and keeping in view the status report received from Justice Agrawal and the fact that the Income-Tax Department does not oppose the sale of the properties in question provided their rights were suitably protected, we direct that the five properties referred to above shall be offered by SEBI for sale afresh on the following conditions: 1) The price offered by the highest bidder for the five properties except for the property situate at Ajmer shall be the reserve price for the fresh auction to be conducted by SEBI. For the property situate at Ajmer the reserve price shall be taken at Rs. 41,00,00,000/-. We say so because Mr. Vikas Singh, learned senior counsel appearing for the successful bidder for the property at Ajmer submits that he has instruction to match the offer made by Shri Rajinder Daga at Rs. 41,00,00,000/-. 2) In the case of property at Ajmer and so also the four other properties mentioned above, the prospective bidders shall deposit with SEBI forfeitable security equivalent to 25% of the reserve price for the properties mentioned above. The deposit shall be made in the manner stipulated in the notice to be issued by SEBI. 3) Needless to say that in case after deposit of the forfeitable security amount the highest bidder does not make good his offer or does not participate in the auction. The amount so deposited shall be liable to be forfeited. 4) In case any one of the properties, does not attract any bid higher than the one received by SEBI in the first auction, the SEBI shall be free to finalise the sale and to issue the requisite sale Certificate in favour of highest successful bidder in the previous
7 auction. A report on the progress made in the fresh auction shall be filed in this Court within six weeks. Mr. Kapil Sibal has today handed over to Mr. Arvind Datar, two Demand Drafts amounting to Rs. 50,00,00,000/- and 20,00,00,000/- apart from Rs. 130,00,00,000/- trabsferred by by RTGS making a total of Rs. 200,00,00,000/- in compliance with the order passed by us on the last date of hearing. He submits that the road map which he had promised to file is being finalised and has already been shared with Mr. Shekhar Naphade, learned Amicus and Mr. Arvind Datar. He submits that there are some dimensions of that road map that require to be discussed with the counsel opposite. He submits that the interim arrangement already made could in the meantime continue till 28.11.2016 by which date the Saharas shall deposit a further amount of Rs. 200 crores of which 15% is today handed over to Mr. Datar in the Court by way of a Bank draft while balance of Rs. 185 crores shall be paid before the next date of hearing. Post on Monday i.e. 28.11.2016 at 2 P.M. Interim arrangement shall continue subject to the making of the deposit of balance of Rs. 185 crores in the meantime. (Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
èZ1ITEM NO.302 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSI.A. Nos. 83-85 of 2015, 104-106 of 2015, 131 of 2015, 158-160 of2016, 180-182 of 2016, 188-189 of 2016, 190-191 of 2016, 194-195 of2016, 205-207 of 2016, 208 of 2016, 209-210 of 2016, 211 of 2016,212-214 of 2016, 218-220 of 2016 and 227 of 2016 in CONMT.PET.(C)No. 412 and 413 of 2012 In C.A. No. 9813 and 9833/2011 and C.P. ©No. 260 of 2013 in C.A. No. 8643 of 2012S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(with appln. (s) for directions, impleadment and intervention,appropriate orders and provisional release and office report)Date : 21/10/2016 This petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R.DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.SIKRI M/s. Shekhar Naphade, Sr. Adv. (A.C.)For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P.Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Niharika, Adv. M/s. K.J.John & CO. For Respondent(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv.CP 412 & 413/12 Mr. Narendra Hooda, Sr. Adv.Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv.Mr. Aarohi Bhalla, Adv.Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv.Mr. Nijam Pasha, Adv.Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv.Mr. Nikhil Jain, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv.Mr. Salim Inamdar, Adv.Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv.Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav, Adv.Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv.Mr. Sarthak Nayak, Adv.2I.A. 232/16 Mr. Salman Khurshid, Sr. Adv.Mr. Yunus Malik, Adv.MS. Saroj Bala, Adv.Mr. Sanjeev Agarwal, Adv. I.As. 212-214/16 Mr. Nidesh Gupta, Sr. Adv. Mr. Soayib Qureshi, Adv. Mr. Rabin Majumdar, Adv.I.A 188-189 Mr. Bishwajit Bhattacharya, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pawan Upadhayay, Adv. Mr. Sarvjit Pratap Singh, Adv. Ms. Sharmila Upadhyay,Adv. I.A.231/16 Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv.Mr. Anish Maheshwari, Adv.Ms. Farha Malik, Adv.M/o Law & Justice Mr. Tushar Mehta, ASG, Mr. D.L.Chidananda, Adv. Ms. Sadhna Sandhu, Adv. Mr. M.K.Maroria, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar,Adv.I.A. 211/16 Mr. K.V.Viswanathan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Amit Singh Chadha, Sr. Adv. Mr. G.Umapathy, adv. Mr. S.Vasudevan, Adv. Mr. Vipin Nair, adv. Mr. P.B.Suresh, Adv. Mr. Aditya Singh, Adv.
Mr. R. Mekhala, Adv. Mr. Rakesh K. Sharma,Adv. Mr. Abhay Pratap Singh, Adv. Mr. Prithu Garg, Adv.I.A 227/16 Mr. Anupam Lal Das, Adv. Mr. Sahil Monga, Adv.I.A. 215/16 Mr. Pravin Bahadur, Adv. Mr. Amit Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Rajan Narain, Adv.I.A. 209/10 Mr. Rahul Sharma, Adv. Mr. P.N.Puri, Adv.RBI Mr. Ramesh Babu M.R., Adv. Ms. Swati Setia, Adv. Mr. Yash Pal Dhingra,Adv. Mr. Amitabh Chaturvedi, Adv. Mr. Sumit Kumar Shukla, Adv.3 Ms. Rakhi Ray, Adv. Mr. Niraj Sharma,Adv. Mr. C. K. Sasi,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Agrawal,Adv. Mr. G.Sivabalamurugan, Adv. Ms. Anagha S. Desai,Adv. Mr. Amit Anand Tiwari,Adv. Mr. P. N. Puri,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R I.As No. 188-189 of 2016 :Issue notice.Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. accepts notice and shallfile his objections to these I.As within four weeks.Additional affidavit be filed by Ms. SharmilaUpadhayay, Adv. setting out the details of the salary drawn by theapplicant explaining the source of amount lying in the Bank.I.As No. 212-214 of 2016 :Mr. Arvind Datar, learned senior counsel has drawnour attention to the 18 th Status report filed by JusticeB.N.Agrawal. From a reading whereof it appears that the saleproperty situated in Bahriach has since been cancelled. We aretold by Mr. Arvind Datar that this property is now free to be soldby Saharas themselves. Mr. Nidesh Gupta, learned senior counselseeks leave to withdraw these I.As. which are hereby dismissed aswithdrawn.4 Mr. Gupta has today handed over a bank draft for a sum ofRs. 4,05,00,000/- representing part of the sale consideration forBahriach property which Saharas has agreed to sell to Mr. Gupta'sclient. He submits that the balance amount of Rs. 20,25,00,000/-shall be deposited in SEBI Sahara Account within a period of thirtydays from today. That statement is recorded.I.A. No. 227 of 2016 : Issue notice to the counsel opposite. Objections to this I.A. shall be filed before the nextdate of hearing i.e. 28.11.2016. I.As. No. 218-220 of 2016 :Pursuant to our orders passed earlier, SEBI had offeredfor sale of seven properties situate at different locations in thecountry. Five of those properties situate at Ajmer, Vellore,Thiruchirapalli, Ujjain and Firozabad appear to have been attachedby the Income-Tax authorities under the provisions of Income-TaxAct. Realising that the said properties had been attached, SEBIappear to have denied the sale certificates to the highest bidders
and refunded the amount deposited by them. When the matter wasreported to Justice B.N.Agrawal, His Lordship has recommended thatthe auction in regard to the attached properties recommended thatthe auction in regard to the attached properties may also bepermitted under the orders of this Court in view of the fact thatthe Income-Tax Department does not oppose the auction but only laysa claim to the sale proceed thereof.5 When the matter came up today before us, it was contended byMr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel appearing for SEBI thatwhile Ajmer property had fetched Rs.26.51,00,000/- the Saharas havereceived an offer of Rs. 41,00,00,000/- from one Shri RajinderDaga which is substantially higher amount than the one at which theSEBI proposes to sell the said property. He submits that in regardto the other attached property also if a fresh sale is ordered,the same would fetch much higher the proposed amount than the oneearlier recovered by SEBI. He urged that this Court could directSEBI to re-auction the said properties on the condition that thehigher amount offered for the same in the previous auction shall betaken as the reserve price for the said properties except in thecase of property at Ajmer where the reserve price shall be treatedto be Rs. 41,00,00,000/- offered by Shri Rajinder Daga. Hesubmits that in order to ensure that only serious purchasers comeforward, this Court could stipulate suitable conditions includingone for deposit of forfeitable security so that in the event ofany person making an offer and later backing out, the amount sofurnished could be forfeited.Mr. Arvind Datar has no serious objection to the SEBI holdinga second round of auction for the properties mentioned above onsuch conditions as may be stipulated by this Court. He urged thatthe amount so received could be initially deposited in the SEBISahara Account subject to such directions as toapportionment/appropriation whereof as this Court may direct at anappropriate stage keeping in view the claim made by the Income-Taxdepartment over the same.6In the circumstances, therefore, and keeping in view thestatus report received from Justice Agrawal and the fact that theIncome-Tax Department does not oppose the sale of the properties inquestion provided their rights were suitably protected, we directthat the five properties referred to above shall be offered by SEBIfor sale afresh on the following conditions:1) The price offered by the highest bidder for the fiveproperties except for the property situate at Ajmer shall be thereserve price for the fresh auction to be conducted by SEBI. Forthe property situate at Ajmer the reserve price shall be taken atRs. 41,00,00,000/-. We say so because Mr. Vikas Singh, learnedsenior counsel appearing for the successful bidder for the propertyat Ajmer submits that he has instruction to match the offer made byShri Rajinder Daga at Rs. 41,00,00,000/-.2) In the case of property at Ajmer and so also the four otherproperties mentioned above, the prospective bidders shall depositwith SEBI forfeitable security equivalent to 25% of the reserveprice for the properties mentioned above. The deposit shall bemade in the manner stipulated in the notice to be issued by SEBI.3) Needless to say that in case after deposit of theforfeitable security amount the highest bidder does not make goodhis offer or does not participate in the auction. The amount sodeposited shall be liable to be forfeited.4) In case any one of the properties, does not attract any bidhigher than the one received by SEBI in the first auction, the SEBIshall be free to finalise the sale and to issue the requisite saleCertificate in favour of highest successful bidder in the previous7auction.A report on the progress made in the fresh auction shall be
filed in this Court within six weeks.Mr. Kapil Sibal has today handed over to Mr. Arvind Datar,two Demand Drafts amounting to Rs. 50,00,00,000/- and20,00,00,000/- apart from Rs. 130,00,00,000/- trabsferred by byRTGS making a total of Rs. 200,00,00,000/- in compliance with theorder passed by us on the last date of hearing. He submits that theroad map which he had promised to file is being finalised and hasalready been shared with Mr. Shekhar Naphade, learned Amicus andMr. Arvind Datar. He submits that there are some dimensions ofthat road map that require to be discussed with the counselopposite. He submits that the interim arrangement already madecould in the meantime continue till 28.11.2016 by which date theSaharas shall deposit a further amount of Rs. 200 crores of which15% is today handed over to Mr. Datar in the Court by way of a Bankdraft while balance of Rs. 185 crores shall be paid before the nextdate of hearing.Post on Monday i.e. 28.11.2016 at 2 P.M. Interim arrangementshall continue subject to the making of the deposit of balance ofRs. 185 crores in the meantime.(Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
ITEM NO.805 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A.No.227/2016 in Contempt Petition (C) No.412/2012 In C.A.No.9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (With office report) Date : 20/10/2016 This matter was mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKAR For Petitioner(s) *Proxy counsel (Mentioned by) for Mr. Anupam Lal Das,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List the application on 21 st October, 2016, before the appropriate Bench. (Sarita Purohit) (Sneh Bala Mehra ) Court Master Assistant Registrar (Mentioning slip is attached with R/P.) *Appearance slip not being given.
\232ITEM NO.805 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSI.A.No.227/2016 in Contempt Petition (C) No.412/2012 In C.A.No.9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(With office report)Date : 20/10/2016 This matter was mentioned today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKARFor Petitioner(s) *Proxy counsel (Mentioned by)for Mr. Anupam Lal Das,Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RList the application on 21 st October, 2016, beforethe appropriate Bench. (Sarita Purohit) (Sneh Bala Mehra ) Court Master Assistant Registrar (Mentioning slip is attached with R/P.)*Appearance slip not being given.
ITEM NO.810 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. Nos. 188-189 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 30/09/2016 This I.A. was mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKAR For Petitioner(s) M/s. K.J.John & CO. For Respondent(s) Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. UPON being mentioned the Court made the following O R D E R Post I.As. No. 188-189 as and when the Bench seized of the matter is constituted. (Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
êITEM NO.810 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSI.A. Nos. 188-189 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No.9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)Date : 30/09/2016 This I.A. was mentioned today.CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKARFor Petitioner(s) M/s. K.J.John & CO. For Respondent(s) Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. UPON being mentioned the Court made the following O R D E R Post I.As. No. 188-189 as and when the Bench seized ofthe matter is constituted.(Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
1 ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A.NOS. 221-223/2016 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412 & 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9813 & 9833/2011 AND C.P. (C)NO.260/2013 IN C.A.NO.8643/2012 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (for modification of court's order and office report) Date : 28/09/2016 These applications were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R.DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.SIKRI Mr . Shekhar Napahade, Sr.Adv. (A.C.) For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P.Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, adv. Ms. Surkha Raman, adv. Mr. Anuj Sarma, Adv. Ms. Niharika, Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Mr. Narendra Hooda, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. Mr. Aarohi Bhalla, Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Nijam Pasha, Adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Jain, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Salim Inamdar, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv. Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Mr. Sarthak Nayak, Adv.
2 Mr. Pravin Bahadur, Adv. Mr. Amit Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Rajan Narain, Adv. M/o Law and Justice Mr. Tushar Mehta, ASG, & Income-Tax Deptt. Mr. Rana Mukherjee, Sr. Adv. Ms. Sadhna Sandhu, Adv. Mr. M.K.Maroria, Adv. Mr. D.L.Chidananda, Adv. Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv. Mr. M.K.Maroria, Adv. Mr. B.K.Prasad, Adv. Ms. Anil Katiyar, Adv. Mr. G.Umapathy, Adv. Mr. Rakesh K.Sharma, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R We have heard Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondents-contemnors, M/s Shekhar Naphade, learned Amicus Curiae and Arvind Datar, learned senior counsel appearing for SEBI. Mr. Arvind Datar submits that out of eight properties offered for sale, six were already attached by the Income-tax Department. The result was that only two properties could be sold by SEBI for a total amount of Rs. 61.44/- crores which amount has been credited to the SEBI Sahara Refund Account. Regarding the remaining six properties, although certain amounts were received by SEBI from the prospective purchasers, SEBI is going to refund the amount back to the prospective purchasers. He submits that 13 other items of property which are un-encumbered have been advertised for sale on E- auction and the progress made on that front shall be reported to this Court by the next date of hearing.
3 Mr. Sibal seeks some time to verify whether Saharas were aware of the attachment orders passed qua 47 properties out of a list of 60 furnished by them for sale through SEBI and, if so, the reason why the fact of such properties being already attached may not disclosed to this Court. He further submits that instead of depositing the balance amount in small instalments, Saharas propose to liquidate the liability in lump in which connection they are prepared to file a road-map/scheme within a period of one month. He submits that Saharas will support the scheme so filed by an undertaking that the balance amount recoverable from them shall be deposited in terms of the said scheme without fail. He prays for time till 24 th October, 2016 to furnish the scheme/road-map proposed by him and submits that the interim arrangement already made could be continued till that date in modification of our Order dated 23.09.2016. There is some confusion about the total amount payable by Saharas and the amount actually deposited by them so far. The figures being cited at the Bar need reconciliation. We direct that Saharas shall reconcile the figures with SEBI and file a joint statement as to the amount already deposited. SEBI may also after giving credit of the amount so deposited indicate the balance amount towards principal and interest due on the same before the next date of hearing. We have in the past while extending the interim arrangement directed deposit of a certain amount towards the liquidation of the outstanding liability. Saharas have complied with the said
4 direction regarding deposit. In the circumstances and keeping in view the fact that even SEBI and Amicus agree to a road map being examined by this Court for liquidation of the balance liability, we extend the interim arrangement already made till 24 th October, 2016 on the condition that the Saharas/contemnors shall deposit with SEBI a further sum of Rs. 200/- crores (Rupees Two hundred Crores only) during the intervening period. We make it clear that in case the deposit is not made, the Saharas shall stand committed to jail on 24 th October, 2016, the date fixed for the next hearing. I.As. No. 221-223 of 2016 are disposed of accordingly. Post I.As No. 83-85 of 2015, 104-105 of 2015 etc.etc. again on 24 th October, 2016 at 2 P.M. (Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
\212.1ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSI.A.NOS. 221-223/2016 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412 & 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9813 & 9833/2011 AND C.P. (C)NO.260/2013 IN C.A.NO.8643/2012 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(for modification of court's order and office report)Date : 28/09/2016 These applications were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R.DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.SIKRI Mr . Shekhar Napahade, Sr.Adv. (A.C.)For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P.Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, adv. Ms. Surkha Raman, adv. Mr. Anuj Sarma, Adv. Ms. Niharika, Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Mr. Narendra Hooda, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. Mr. Aarohi Bhalla, Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Nijam Pasha, Adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Jain, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Salim Inamdar, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv. Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Mr. Sarthak Nayak, Adv.2 Mr. Pravin Bahadur, Adv.Mr. Amit Agarwal, Adv.Mr. Rajan Narain, Adv.M/o Law and Justice Mr. Tushar Mehta, ASG,& Income-Tax Deptt. Mr. Rana Mukherjee, Sr. Adv.Ms. Sadhna Sandhu, Adv. Mr. M.K.Maroria, Adv.Mr. D.L.Chidananda, Adv.Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv.Mr. M.K.Maroria, Adv.Mr. B.K.Prasad, Adv.Ms. Anil Katiyar, Adv.Mr. G.Umapathy, Adv.Mr. Rakesh K.Sharma, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R We have heard Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counselappearing for the respondents-contemnors, M/s Shekhar Naphade,learned Amicus Curiae and Arvind Datar, learned senior counselappearing for SEBI. Mr. Arvind Datar submits that out of eightproperties offered for sale, six were already attached by theIncome-tax Department. The result was that only two propertiescould be sold by SEBI for a total amount of Rs. 61.44/- croreswhich amount has been credited to the SEBI Sahara Refund Account.Regarding the remaining six properties, although certain amountswere received by SEBI from the prospective purchasers, SEBI isgoing to refund the amount back to the prospective purchasers. Hesubmits that 13 other items of property which are un-encumbered
have been advertised for sale on E- auction and the progress madeon that front shall be reported to this Court by the next date ofhearing.3Mr. Sibal seeks some time to verify whether Saharas were awareof the attachment orders passed qua 47 properties out of a list of60 furnished by them for sale through SEBI and, if so, the reasonwhy the fact of such properties being already attached may notdisclosed to this Court. He further submits that instead ofdepositing the balance amount in small instalments, Saharas proposeto liquidate the liability in lump in which connection they areprepared to file a road-map/scheme within a period of one month.He submits that Saharas will support the scheme so filed by anundertaking that the balance amount recoverable from them shallbe deposited in terms of the said scheme without fail. He praysfor time till 24 th October, 2016 to furnish the scheme/road-mapproposed by him and submits that the interim arrangement alreadymade could be continued till that date in modification of our Orderdated 23.09.2016.There is some confusion about the total amount payable bySaharas and the amount actually deposited by them so far. Thefigures being cited at the Bar need reconciliation. We directthat Saharas shall reconcile the figures with SEBI and file ajoint statement as to the amount already deposited. SEBI may alsoafter giving credit of the amount so deposited indicate the balanceamount towards principal and interest due on the same before thenext date of hearing.We have in the past while extending the interim arrangementdirected deposit of a certain amount towards the liquidation of theoutstanding liability. Saharas have complied with the said4direction regarding deposit. In the circumstances and keeping inview the fact that even SEBI and Amicus agree to a road map beingexamined by this Court for liquidation of the balance liability, weextend the interim arrangement already made till 24 th October, 2016on the condition that the Saharas/contemnors shall deposit withSEBI a further sum of Rs. 200/- crores (Rupees Two hundred Croresonly) during the intervening period. We make it clear that incase the deposit is not made, the Saharas shall stand committed tojail on 24 th October, 2016, the date fixed for the next hearing. I.As. No. 221-223 of 2016 are disposed of accordingly. Post I.As No. 83-85 of 2015, 104-105 of 2015 etc.etc. againon 24 th October, 2016 at 2 P.M.(Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
1 ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. NOS. 83-85/2015, 104-106/2015, 131/2015, 180-182/2016, 194-195/2016, 205-207/2016, 209-210 /2016, 211/2016, 212-214/2016 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412 & 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9813 & 9833/2011 AND C.P. (C)NO.260/2013 IN C.A.NO.8643/2012 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (for directions, impleadment and intervention, appropriate orders and provisional release and office report) with I.A. No. 208/2016 in C.P. No. 412/2012 in C.A. No. 9813/2012 (Application for impleadment) I.A. Nos. 218-220/2016 in C.P.(C) No. 412,413/2012 and 260/2013 in C.A. No. 9813,9833 and 8643/2011 (Application for appropriate orders) Date : 23/09/2016 These applications were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI Mr. Shekhar Napahade, Sr.Adv. (A.C.) For Petitioner(s) Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, adv. Mr. Anuj Sarma, Adv. Ms. Niharika, Adv. Mr. Aman Shukla, Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. For Respondent(s) Dr. Rajiv Dhawan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Parsi Pardivala, Sr. Adv. Mr. Narender Hooda, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary, adv.
2 Mr. Nijam Pasha, Adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Jain, Adv Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Salim Inamdar, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv. Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Mr. Sarthak Nayak, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Sujit Keshri, Adv. Mr. Rana Mukherjee, Sr. Adv. Mr. Tushar Mehta, ASG, Mr. S.Gurukrishna Kumar, Sr. Adv Mr. D.L.Chidananda, Adv. Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv. Ms. Sadhna Sandhu, Adv. Mr. M.K.Maroria, Adv. Mr. B.K.Prasad, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar,Adv. Mr. Balbir Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Rabin Majumder,Adv. Mr. K.V.Vishwanaathan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pravin Bahadur, Adv. Mr. Amit Aggarwal, adv. Mr. Rajan Narain, Adv. Mr. Paras Kuhad, Sr. Adv. Mr. Omkar Geedh, Adv. Mr. Jitin Chaturvedi, Adv. Ms. Swati Vijaywargiya, Adv. Ms. Aditi Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Sunil Fernadese, Adv. Ms. Astha Sharma, Adv. Mr. Puneeth K.G., Adv. Mr. Nikesh Tyagi, Adv. Mr. G.Umapathy, Adv. Mr. Rakesh Kr. Sharma,Adv. Mr. Aditya Singh, Adv. Ms. R.Mekhala, Adv. Mr. Ramesh Babu M. R.,Adv. Ms. Swati Setia, Adv.
3 Mr. Saiby Jose Kidangoor, Adv. Mr. C.K.Sasi, Adv. Mr. Manukrishnan, Adv. Mr. Amit Anand Tiwari,Adv. Mr. Yash Pal Dhingra,Adv. Mr. P.N. Puri,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R At the request of the learned counsel for the contemnors, post again on Monday i.e. 3 rd October, 2016 at 2 P.M. In the meantime, the interim arrangement made by this Court shall stand terminated. The contemnors are given one week's time to surrender back to custody. (Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
4 ITEM NO.826 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII (MM) S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. NO..... of 2016 in Contempt Petition (C) Nos. 412 and 413 of 2012 in Civil Appeal Nos. 9813 and 9833 of 2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (Application for direction/modification) and Contempt Petition (C) No. 260 of 2013 in Civil Appeal No. 8643 of 2012) Date : 23/09/2016 This application was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI Mr. Shekhar Napahade, Sr.Adv. (A.C.) For Petitioner(s) Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, adv. Mr. Anuj Sarma, Adv. Ms. Niharika, Adv. Mr. Aman Shukla, Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Mr. Parsi Pardivala, Sr. Adv. Mr. Narender Hooda, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary, adv. Mr. Nijam Pasha, Adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Jain, Adv Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Salim Inamdar, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv. Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Mr. Sarthak Nayak, Adv.
5 Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Sujit Keshri, Adv. Mr. Rana Mukherjee, Sr. Adv. Mr. Tushar Mehta, ASG, Mr. S.Gurukrishna Kumar, Sr. Adv Mr. D.L.Chidananda, Adv. Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv. Ms. Sadhna Sandhu, Adv. Mr. M.K.Maroria, Adv. Mr. B.K.Prasad, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar,Adv. Mr. Balbir Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Rabin Majumder,Adv. Mr. K.V.Vishwanaathan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pravin Bahadur, Adv. Mr. Amit Aggarwal, Adv. Mr. Rajan Narain, Adv. Mr. Paras Kuhad, Sr. Adv. Mr. Omkar Geedh, Adv. Mr. Jitin Chaturvedi, Adv. Ms. Swati Vijaywargiya, Adv. Ms. Aditi Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Sunil Fernadese, Adv. Ms. Astha Sharma, Adv. Mr. Puneeth K.G., Adv. Mr. Nikesh Tyagi, Adv. Mr. G.Umapathy, Adv. Mr. Rakesh Kr. Sharma,Adv. Mr. Aditya Singh, Adv. Ms. R.Mekhala, Adv. Mr. Ramesh Babu M. R.,Adv. Ms. Swati Setia, Adv. Mr. Saiby Jose Kidangoor, Adv. Mr. C.K.Sasi, Adv. Mr. Manukrishnan, Adv. Mr. Amit Anand Tiwari,Adv. Mr. Yash Pal Dhingra,Adv. Mr. P.N. Puri,Adv.
6 UPON being MENTIONED the Court made the following O R D E R At the request of Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel appearing for the Saharas/contemnors, post I.A. No..... of 2016 for modification of this Court's order of even date on Wednesday i.e. 28.09.2016 at 3.30 P.M. (Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
d31ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSI.A. NOS. 83-85/2015, 104-106/2015, 131/2015, 180-182/2016,194-195/2016, 205-207/2016, 209-210 /2016, 211/2016, 212-214/2016in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412 & 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9813 & 9833/2011AND C.P. (C)NO.260/2013 IN C.A.NO.8643/2012 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(for directions, impleadment and intervention, appropriate orders and provisional release and office report)withI.A. No. 208/2016 in C.P. No. 412/2012 in C.A. No. 9813/2012(Application for impleadment)I.A. Nos. 218-220/2016 in C.P.(C) No. 412,413/2012 and 260/2013 in C.A. No. 9813,9833 and 8643/2011(Application for appropriate orders)Date : 23/09/2016 These applications were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI Mr. Shekhar Napahade, Sr.Adv. (A.C.)For Petitioner(s) Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, adv. Mr. Anuj Sarma, Adv. Ms. Niharika, Adv. Mr. Aman Shukla, Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. For Respondent(s) Dr. Rajiv Dhawan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Parsi Pardivala, Sr. Adv. Mr. Narender Hooda, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary, adv.2 Mr. Nijam Pasha, Adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Jain, Adv Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Salim Inamdar, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv. Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Mr. Sarthak Nayak, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Sujit Keshri, Adv. Mr. Rana Mukherjee, Sr. Adv. Mr. Tushar Mehta, ASG, Mr. S.Gurukrishna Kumar, Sr. Adv Mr. D.L.Chidananda, Adv. Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv. Ms. Sadhna Sandhu, Adv. Mr. M.K.Maroria, Adv. Mr. B.K.Prasad, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar,Adv. Mr. Balbir Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Rabin Majumder,Adv. Mr. K.V.Vishwanaathan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pravin Bahadur, Adv. Mr. Amit Aggarwal, adv. Mr. Rajan Narain, Adv. Mr. Paras Kuhad, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Omkar Geedh, Adv. Mr. Jitin Chaturvedi, Adv. Ms. Swati Vijaywargiya, Adv. Ms. Aditi Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Sunil Fernadese, Adv. Ms. Astha Sharma, Adv. Mr. Puneeth K.G., Adv. Mr. Nikesh Tyagi, Adv. Mr. G.Umapathy, Adv. Mr. Rakesh Kr. Sharma,Adv. Mr. Aditya Singh, Adv. Ms. R.Mekhala, Adv. Mr. Ramesh Babu M. R.,Adv. Ms. Swati Setia, Adv.3 Mr. Saiby Jose Kidangoor, Adv. Mr. C.K.Sasi, Adv. Mr. Manukrishnan, Adv. Mr. Amit Anand Tiwari,Adv. Mr. Yash Pal Dhingra,Adv. Mr. P.N. Puri,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R At the request of the learned counsel for the contemnors,post again on Monday i.e. 3 rd October, 2016 at 2 P.M.In the meantime, the interim arrangement made by thisCourt shall stand terminated. The contemnors are given one week'stime to surrender back to custody.(Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master4ITEM NO.826 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII(MM) S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSI.A. NO..... of 2016 in Contempt Petition (C) Nos. 412 and 413 of2012 in Civil Appeal Nos. 9813 and 9833 of 2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(Application for direction/modification)and Contempt Petition (C) No. 260 of 2013 in Civil Appeal No. 8643 of 2012)Date : 23/09/2016 This application was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI Mr. Shekhar Napahade, Sr.Adv. (A.C.)For Petitioner(s) Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, adv. Mr. Anuj Sarma, Adv. Ms. Niharika, Adv. Mr. Aman Shukla, Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Mr. Parsi Pardivala, Sr. Adv. Mr. Narender Hooda, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary, adv. Mr. Nijam Pasha, Adv.
Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Jain, Adv Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Salim Inamdar, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv. Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Mr. Sarthak Nayak, Adv.5 Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Sujit Keshri, Adv. Mr. Rana Mukherjee, Sr. Adv. Mr. Tushar Mehta, ASG, Mr. S.Gurukrishna Kumar, Sr. Adv Mr. D.L.Chidananda, Adv. Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv. Ms. Sadhna Sandhu, Adv. Mr. M.K.Maroria, Adv. Mr. B.K.Prasad, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar,Adv. Mr. Balbir Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Rabin Majumder,Adv. Mr. K.V.Vishwanaathan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pravin Bahadur, Adv. Mr. Amit Aggarwal, Adv. Mr. Rajan Narain, Adv. Mr. Paras Kuhad, Sr. Adv. Mr. Omkar Geedh, Adv. Mr. Jitin Chaturvedi, Adv. Ms. Swati Vijaywargiya, Adv. Ms. Aditi Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Sunil Fernadese, Adv. Ms. Astha Sharma, Adv. Mr. Puneeth K.G., Adv. Mr. Nikesh Tyagi, Adv. Mr. G.Umapathy, Adv. Mr. Rakesh Kr. Sharma,Adv. Mr. Aditya Singh, Adv. Ms. R.Mekhala, Adv. Mr. Ramesh Babu M. R.,Adv. Ms. Swati Setia, Adv. Mr. Saiby Jose Kidangoor, Adv. Mr. C.K.Sasi, Adv. Mr. Manukrishnan, Adv. Mr. Amit Anand Tiwari,Adv. Mr. Yash Pal Dhingra,Adv. Mr. P.N. Puri,Adv.6 UPON being MENTIONED the Court made the following O R D E R At the request of Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counselappearing for the Saharas/contemnors, post I.A. No..... of 2016 formodification of this Court's order of even date on Wednesday i.e.28.09.2016 at 3.30 P.M.(Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
ITEM NO.804 COURT NO.3 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. No.... of 2016 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (Application for appropriate orders) Date : 22/09/2016 This I.A. was mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MISHRA For Petitioner(s) Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. (Mentioned by) M/s. K.J.John And Co. For Respondent(s) Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. Mr. Gautam Kejriwal, Adv. UPON being mentioned the Court made the following O R D E R Post I.A. No.... of 2016 (Application for appropriate orders) tomorrow i.e. on 23.09.2016 before an appropriate Bench. (Shashi Sareen) (Renuka Sadana) AR-cum-PS Assistant Registrar
ITEM NO.805 COURT NO.3 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. No.208 of 2016 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (Application for impleadment) Date : 22/09/2016 This I.A. was mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MISHRA For Petitioner (s) M/s. K.J.John & Co. For Applicant(s) Mr. Saiby Jose Kidangoor, Adv.(Mentioned by) Mr. C.K.Sasi, Adv. UPON being mentioned the Court made the following O R D E R Post I.A. No. 208 of 2016 tomorrow i.e. on 23.09.2016 before an appropriate Bench. (Shashi Sareen) (Renuka Sadana) AR-cum-PS Assistant Registrar
°ITEM NO.804 COURT NO.3 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSI.A. No.... of 2016 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No.9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(Application for appropriate orders)Date : 22/09/2016 This I.A. was mentioned today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MISHRAFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. (Mentioned by) M/s. K.J.John And Co. For Respondent(s) Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. Mr. Gautam Kejriwal, Adv. UPON being mentioned the Court made the following O R D E R Post I.A. No.... of 2016 (Application for appropriateorders) tomorrow i.e. on 23.09.2016 before an appropriate Bench.(Shashi Sareen) (Renuka Sadana) AR-cum-PS Assistant RegistrarITEM NO.805 COURT NO.3 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSI.A. No.208 of 2016 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No.9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(Application for impleadment)Date : 22/09/2016 This I.A. was mentioned today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MISHRAFor Petitioner (s) M/s. K.J.John & Co. For Applicant(s) Mr. Saiby Jose Kidangoor, Adv.(Mentioned by) Mr. C.K.Sasi, Adv. UPON being mentioned the Court made the following O R D E R Post I.A. No. 208 of 2016 tomorrow i.e. on 23.09.2016before an appropriate Bench.(Shashi Sareen) (Renuka Sadana) AR-cum-PS Assistant Registrar
1 Contempt Petitions (C) No.412 and 413 of 2012 ITEM NO.814 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A.NOS. 83-85/2015, 104-106/2016, 180-182/2016, 194-195/2016, 205-207/2016 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412 & 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9813 & 9833/2011 AND C.P. (C)NO.260/2013 IN C.A.NO.8643/2012 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (For directions, impleadment and intervention, appropriate orders and provisional release and office report) Date : 16/09/2016 These applications were mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKAR Mr. Shekhar Napahade,Sr.Adv. (AC) For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P. Datar,Sr.Adv. (SEBI) Mr. Pratap Venugopal,Adv. Mr. Surekha Raman,Adv. Mr. Purushottam Kumar Jha,Adv. Mr. Anuj Sarma,Adv. Mr. Niharika,Adv. Mr. Aman Shukla,Adv. For M/s. K. J. John & Co. For Respondent(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal,Sr.Adv. (mentioned by) Mr. Narendra Hooda,Sr.Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. Mr. Aarohi Bhalla,Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary,Adv. Mr. Nijam Pasha,Adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi,Adv. Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav,Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. Mr. Ramesh Babu M. R.,Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar,Adv.
2 Contempt Petitions (C) No.412 and 413 of 2012 UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Taken on Board. Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel appearing for the contemnors/Saharas, points out that S.E.B.I. v. SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPORTION LTD. AND ORS . Was directed to be listed for further orders today i.e. Friday, the 16 th September, 2016 at 2:00 p.m. before a Bench comprising Hon'ble the Chief Justice, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anil R. Dave and Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.K. Sikri The matter has, however, not appeared on Board on account of the non-availability of Hon'ble Dave, J. He further submits that since the interim arrangement made by this Court in terms of Order dated 6 th May, 2016 and extended from time to time expires today and in case same is not extended further, the contemnors/Saharas shall have to surrender back to custody. He submits that this Court may direct extension of the interim arrangement till the next date of hearing since the contemnors/Saharas have already deposited Rs.300 crores (Rupees three hundred crores) in terms of the previous order passed by this Court and thereby complied with the direction of this Court. Mr. Arvind P. Dattar, learned senior counsel appearing for SEBI, does not dispute this position. In the circumstances and keeping in view the fact that the regular Bench hearing the matter is not available on account of non-availability of Hon'ble Dave, J., we direct that the interim arrangement already made by this Court shall continue till Friday, the 23 rd September, 2016. Post on Friday, the 23 rd September, 2016 at 2:00 p.m. (MAHABIR SINGH) (VEENA KHERA) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER
Ò1Contempt Petitions (C) No.412 and 413 of 2012ITEM NO.814 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSI.A.NOS. 83-85/2015, 104-106/2016, 180-182/2016, 194-195/2016,205-207/2016 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412 & 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9813& 9833/2011 AND C.P. (C)NO.260/2013 IN C.A.NO.8643/2012S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(For directions, impleadment and intervention, appropriate orders and provisional release and office report)Date : 16/09/2016 These applications were mentioned today.CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKARMr. Shekhar Napahade,Sr.Adv. (AC)For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P. Datar,Sr.Adv.(SEBI) Mr. Pratap Venugopal,Adv.Mr. Surekha Raman,Adv.Mr. Purushottam Kumar Jha,Adv.Mr. Anuj Sarma,Adv.Mr. Niharika,Adv.Mr. Aman Shukla,Adv.For M/s. K. J. John & Co. For Respondent(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal,Sr.Adv.(mentioned by) Mr. Narendra Hooda,Sr.Adv.Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv.Mr. Aarohi Bhalla,Adv.Mr. Ayush Choudhary,Adv.Mr. Nijam Pasha,Adv.Mr. Rahul Tripathi,Adv.Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav,Adv.Mr. Vijay Kumar,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv.Mr. Ramesh Babu M. R.,Adv.Mrs. Anil Katiyar,Adv.2Contempt Petitions (C) No.412 and 413 of 2012UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RTaken on Board.Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel appearing for thecontemnors/Saharas, points out that S.E.B.I. v. SAHARA INDIAREAL ESTATE CORPORTION LTD. AND ORS . Was directed to be listedfor further orders today i.e. Friday, the 16 th September, 2016at 2:00 p.m. before a Bench comprising Hon'ble the ChiefJustice, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anil R. Dave and Hon'ble Mr.Justice A.K. Sikri The matter has, however, not appeared onBoard on account of the non-availability of Hon'ble Dave, J.He further submits that since the interim arrangement made bythis Court in terms of Order dated 6 th May, 2016 and extendedfrom time to time expires today and in case same is notextended further, the contemnors/Saharas shall have tosurrender back to custody. He submits that this Court maydirect extension of the interim arrangement till the next dateof hearing since the contemnors/Saharas have already depositedRs.300 crores (Rupees three hundred crores) in terms of theprevious order passed by this Court and thereby complied withthe direction of this Court.Mr. Arvind P. Dattar, learned senior counsel appearing forSEBI, does not dispute this position.In the circumstances and keeping in view the fact that the
regular Bench hearing the matter is not available on account ofnon-availability of Hon'ble Dave, J., we direct that theinterim arrangement already made by this Court shall continuetill Friday, the 23 rd September, 2016.Post on Friday, the 23 rd September, 2016 at 2:00 p.m. (MAHABIR SINGH) (VEENA KHERA) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER
ITEM NO.807 + 811 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. No.131 of 2015 IN CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (With office report) With I.A.No.209 & 210 of 2016 in Contempt Petition (C) No.412 & 413 of 2012 Date : 14/09/2016 These applications were mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKAR For Petitioner(s) Mr. Yash Pal Dhingra, Adv. Mr. Abhijeet Rastogi, Adv. Mr. Rahul Dhawan, Adv. (For applicant in I.A. No.209 & 210 Mr. P.N. Puri, Adv. Of 2016) (Appln. for impleadment/ Mr. Rabin Majumder, Adv. directions) For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List I.A.Nos.131/2015, 209/2016, 210/2016, I.A.No.___/2016 (for impleadment) and I.A.No.____/2016 (for directions) along with other pending applications in Contempt Petition (C) No.412 and 413 of 2012 in C.A. No.9813 of 2011 on Friday, 16 th September, 2016 at 2.00 p.m. (Ashok Raj Singh) (Veena Khera) Court Master Court Master
XITEM NO.807 + 811 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSI.A. No.131 of 2015IN CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(With office report)WithI.A.No.209 & 210 of 2016 in Contempt Petition (C) No.412 & 413 of 2012Date : 14/09/2016 These applications were mentioned today.CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKARFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Yash Pal Dhingra, Adv. Mr. Abhijeet Rastogi, Adv. Mr. Rahul Dhawan, Adv.(For applicant in I.A. No.209 & 210 Mr. P.N. Puri, Adv.Of 2016)(Appln. forimpleadment/ Mr. Rabin Majumder, Adv.directions)For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RList I.A.Nos.131/2015, 209/2016, 210/2016, I.A.No.___/2016(for impleadment) and I.A.No.____/2016 (for directions) alongwith other pending applications in Contempt Petition (C) No.412and 413 of 2012 in C.A. No.9813 of 2011 on Friday, 16 thSeptember, 2016 at 2.00 p.m. (Ashok Raj Singh) (Veena Khera) Court Master Court Master
ITEM NO.18 COURT NO.4 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Civil Appeal Diary No(s). 1028/2016 SAHARA GRACE CONSUMERS GRIEVANCE ASSOCIATION Appellant(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA COMMERCIAL CORPORATION LTD. Respondent(s) (with appln. (s) for c/delay in re-filing appeal and condonation of delay in filing appeal. and office report) Date : 09/09/2016 This appeal was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. NAGAPPAN For Appellant(s) Mr. Rohan Thawani, Adv. Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AOR Mr. Hardeep Singh Anand, Adv. Mr. Anand Daga, Adv. Ms. Anisha Mahajan, Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay condoned. Admit. Tag with Civil Appeal No.7152-7153 of 2016. (Gulshan Kumar Arora) (H.S. Parasher) Court Master Court Master
vITEM NO.18 COURT NO.4 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSCivil Appeal Diary No(s). 1028/2016SAHARA GRACE CONSUMERS GRIEVANCE ASSOCIATION Appellant(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA COMMERCIAL CORPORATION LTD. Respondent(s)(with appln. (s) for c/delay in re-filing appeal and condonation ofdelay in filing appeal. and office report)Date : 09/09/2016 This appeal was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. NAGAPPANFor Appellant(s) Mr. Rohan Thawani, Adv.Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AORMr. Hardeep Singh Anand, Adv.Mr. Anand Daga, Adv.Ms. Anisha Mahajan, Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RDelay condoned.Admit.Tag with Civil Appeal No.7152-7153 of 2016.(Gulshan Kumar Arora) (H.S. Parasher) Court Master Court Master
CA 7152-7153/2016 1 ITEM NO.54 COURT NO.4 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Civil Appeal Nos.7152-7153/2016 SAHARA INDIA COMMERCIAL CORPORATION LIMITED Appellant(s) VERSUS SAHARA GRACE CONSUMER GRIEVANCES ASSOCIATION Respondent(s) (With appln. (s) for permission to file additional documents and stay and office report) Date : 05/09/2016 These appeals were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT For Appellant(s) Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Rohan Ajuja, Adv. Ms. Sonali Dhir, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, AOR For Respondent(s) Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AOR Mr. Aditya Singla, Adv. Ms. Supriya Juneja, AOR Ms. Mehaak Jaggi, Adv. Ms. Manju Jetley, AOR Mr. Franklin Caesar Thomas, Adv. Mr. Chand Qureshi, Adv. Mr. M.P. Siddiqui, Adv. Mr. Himanshu Shekhar, AOR Mr. Ranjan Kumar Pandey, AOR Mr. Rohan Thawan, Adv. Ms. Vandana Sehgal, Adv. Mr. Hardeep Singh Anand, Adv. Mr. Anand Daga, Adv. Ms. Anisha Mahajan, Adv.
CA 7152-7153/2016 2 UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R This Court on 8 th August, 2016, had issued notice on the appeals as well as on the application for stay. Be it noted, this case has been de-tagged from Civil Appeal Nos.6119-6148 of 2015. Therefore, this case shall be listed on a date when the other cases are not listed. As the respondents have already entered appearance, we have taken the prayer for interim relief. Having heard Mr. Vikas Singh, learned senior counsel for the appellant and Mr. Rohan Thawani and Mr. Aditya Singla learned counsel for the respondents, it is directed that the appellant shall deposit a sum of Rs.3.50 crores before the Registry of this Court within eight weeks hence. The amount so deposited shall be kept in a short term fixed deposit in the UCO Bank, Supreme Court Compound, New Delhi, so that interest can be accrued on the same. Let the matter be set out for final hearing after ten weeks. (Chetan Kumar) Court Master (H.S. Parasher) Court Master
SECTION XVII IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 71527153 OF 2016 with INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NOS. 34,56 and 78 OF 2016 (Application for permission to file additional documents ,Stay and permission to file additional documents ) Sahara India Commercial Corporation Limited ...Appellant Versus Sahara Grace Consumer Greivances Association & Etc. ...Respondents OFFICE REPORT The matters above mentioned were listed before the Hon'ble Court on 08.08.2016, when the Court was pleased to pass the following order: “ Exemption from filing O.T. is allowed. Issue notice on the appeals as well as on the application for stay returnable in two weeks. Tag with Civil Appeal Nos. 6119-6148 of 2015.” It is submitted that there is sole respondent in Appeal no. 7152 of 2016 and two respondents in Appeal nos. 7153 of 2016. Notice was issued to all the respondents. Ms. Vandana Sehgal, Advocate has filed caveat/vakalatnama on behalf of sole respondent in Appeal No. 7152 of 2016 but has not filed counter affidavit. Ms. Supriya Juneja, Advocate has filed vakalatnama on behalf of both the respondents in Appeal No. 7153 of 2016 and has on 2 nd September, 2016 filed short reply on behalf of both Respondents. (Copies are circulated herewith). Service is complete in the matter. The matters above mentioned were listed before the Hon'ble Court alongwith connected matters on 12 th August,2016 when the Court was pleased to interalia pass the following order: Civil Appeal Nos.7152-7153/2016 “ List these appeals on 5 th September, 2016.” The matters abovementioned are listed before the Hon'ble Court with this office report. DATED THIS THE 02 nd DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2016. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Copy to : Ms. Supriya Juneja, Advocate Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Advocate Ms. Vanadana Sehgal, Advocate ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
JCA 7152-7153/20161ITEM NO.54 COURT NO.4 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSCivil Appeal Nos.7152-7153/2016SAHARA INDIA COMMERCIAL CORPORATION LIMITED Appellant(s) VERSUSSAHARA GRACE CONSUMER GRIEVANCES ASSOCIATION Respondent(s)(With appln. (s) for permission to file additional documents andstay and office report)Date : 05/09/2016 These appeals were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALITFor Appellant(s) Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv.Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv.Mr. Rohan Ajuja, Adv.Ms. Sonali Dhir, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, AOR For Respondent(s) Ms. Vandana Sehgal, AORMr. Aditya Singla, Adv. Ms. Supriya Juneja, AORMs. Mehaak Jaggi, Adv. Ms. Manju Jetley, AORMr. Franklin Caesar Thomas, Adv.Mr. Chand Qureshi, Adv.Mr. M.P. Siddiqui, Adv. Mr. Himanshu Shekhar, AOR Mr. Ranjan Kumar Pandey, AORMr. Rohan Thawan, Adv.Ms. Vandana Sehgal, Adv.Mr. Hardeep Singh Anand, Adv.Mr. Anand Daga, Adv.Ms. Anisha Mahajan, Adv.CA 7152-7153/20162 UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RThis Court on 8 th August, 2016, had issued notice onthe appeals as well as on the application for stay. Be itnoted, this case has been de-tagged from Civil AppealNos.6119-6148 of 2015. Therefore, this case shall be listedon a date when the other cases are not listed. As the respondents have already entered appearance,we have taken the prayer for interim relief.Having heard Mr. Vikas Singh, learned senior counselfor the appellant and Mr. Rohan Thawani and Mr. Aditya Singlalearned counsel for the respondents, it is directed that theappellant shall deposit a sum of Rs.3.50 crores before theRegistry of this Court within eight weeks hence. The amountso deposited shall be kept in a short term fixed deposit inthe UCO Bank, Supreme Court Compound, New Delhi, so thatinterest can be accrued on the same.Let the matter be set out for final hearing afterten weeks.(Chetan Kumar)Court Master (H.S. Parasher)Court Master
1 ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A.NOS. 205-207/2016 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412 & 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9813 & 9833/2011 AND C.P. (C)NO.260/2013 IN C.A.NO.8643/2012 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (for directions and office report) Date : 02/09/2016 These applications were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R.DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.SIKRI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Shekhar Napahade,Sr. Adv. (A.C.) Ms. Shubhangi Tuli, Adv. Mr. Vikram Sobti, Adv. Mr. Arvind P.Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. MS. Surekha Raman, adv. Mr. Purushottam Kumar Jha, Adv. Mr. Anuj Sarma, Adv. MS. Niharika, Adv. Mr. Aman Shukla, Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Mr. Narendra Hooda, Sr. Adv. Mr. Meet Malhotra, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. Mr. Aarohi Bhalla, Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Nijam Pasha, Adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Jain, Adv. Mr. Simran Jeet Singh, adv. Mr. Salim Inamdar, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv. Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv.
2 Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. Ramesh Babu M. R.,Adv. MS. Swati Setia, Adv. Mr. D..Chidananda, Adv. Ms. Sadhna Sandhu, Adv. Mr. M.K.Maroria, Adv. Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R M/s. Shekhar Naphade and Arvind Datar, learned senior counsel for SEBI to look into these applications and file their response by 16.09.2016. Post on Friday i.e. 16.09.2016. (Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
Æ1ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSI.A.NOS. 205-207/2016 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412 & 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9813 & 9833/2011 AND C.P. (C)NO.260/2013 IN C.A.NO.8643/2012 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(for directions and office report)Date : 02/09/2016 These applications were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R.DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.SIKRIFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Shekhar Napahade,Sr. Adv. (A.C.) Ms. Shubhangi Tuli, Adv. Mr. Vikram Sobti, Adv. Mr. Arvind P.Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. MS. Surekha Raman, adv. Mr. Purushottam Kumar Jha, Adv. Mr. Anuj Sarma, Adv. MS. Niharika, Adv. Mr. Aman Shukla, Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Mr. Narendra Hooda, Sr. Adv. Mr. Meet Malhotra, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. Mr. Aarohi Bhalla, Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Nijam Pasha, Adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Jain, Adv. Mr. Simran Jeet Singh, adv. Mr. Salim Inamdar, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv. Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv.2 Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. Ramesh Babu M. R.,Adv. MS. Swati Setia, Adv. Mr. D..Chidananda, Adv. Ms. Sadhna Sandhu, Adv. Mr. M.K.Maroria, Adv. Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R M/s. Shekhar Naphade and Arvind Datar, learned seniorcounsel for SEBI to look into these applications and file theirresponse by 16.09.2016.Post on Friday i.e. 16.09.2016.(Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
ITEM NO.822 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. Nos. 205-207 of 2016 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) with Contempt Petition (C) No. 413 of 2012 in C.A. No. 9833 of 2011 Contempt Petition (C) No. 260 of 2013 in C.A.No. 8643 of 2012 Date : 26/08/2016 These I.A. were mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKAR HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUD For Petitioner(s) For Respondent(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. (Mentioned by) Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. UPON being mentioned the Court made the following O R D E R Post I.A. Nos. 205-207 of 2016 next week before an appropriate Bench. (Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
È ITEM NO.822 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. Nos. 205-207 of 2016 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) with Contempt Petition (C) No. 413 of 2012 in C.A. No. 9833 of 2011 Contempt Petition (C) No. 260 of 2013 in C.A.No. 8643 of 2012 Date : 26/08/2016 These I.A. were mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKAR HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUD For Petitioner(s) For Respondent(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. (Mentioned by) Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. UPON being mentioned the Court made the following O R D E R Post I.A. Nos. 205-207 of 2016 next week before an appropriate Bench. (Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court MasterSignature Not VerifiedDigitally signed bySHASHI SAREENDate: 2016.08.2713:10:45 ISTReason:
ITEM NO.50 COURT NO.7 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Civil Appeal No(s). 7152-7153/2016 SAHARA INDIA COMMERCIAL CORPORATION LIMITED Appellant(s) VERSUS SAHARA GRACE CONSUMER GRIEVANCES ASSOCIATION Respondent(s) (With appln. (s) for exemption from filing O.T. and permission to file additional documents and stay and office report) Date : 08/08/2016 These appeals were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN B. LOKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. AGRAWAL For Appellant(s) Mr. Gautam Talukdar,Adv. Mr. Rohan Ahuja, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Ms. Sonali Dhir, Adv. For Respondent(s) MS. Vibha Datta Makhija, Sr. Adv. Mr. Rohan Thawani, Adv. Ms. Vandana Sehgal,Adv. Mr. Hardeep Singh Anand, Adv. Mr. Anand Daga, Adv. Ms. Anisha Mahajan, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Exemption from filing O.T. is allowed. Issue notice on the appeals as well as on the application for stay returnable in two weeks. Tag with Civil Appeal Nos. 6119-6148 of 2015. (Meenakshi Kohli) (Shakti Parshad Sharma) Court Master Court Master
\202ITEM NO.50 COURT NO.7 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSCivil Appeal No(s). 7152-7153/2016SAHARA INDIA COMMERCIAL CORPORATION LIMITED Appellant(s) VERSUSSAHARA GRACE CONSUMER GRIEVANCES ASSOCIATION Respondent(s)(With appln. (s) for exemption from filing O.T. and permission tofile additional documents and stay and office report)Date : 08/08/2016 These appeals were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN B. LOKURHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. AGRAWALFor Appellant(s) Mr. Gautam Talukdar,Adv. Mr. Rohan Ahuja, Adv.Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv.Ms. Sonali Dhir, Adv.For Respondent(s) MS. Vibha Datta Makhija, Sr. Adv.Mr. Rohan Thawani, Adv.Ms. Vandana Sehgal,Adv.Mr. Hardeep Singh Anand, Adv.Mr. Anand Daga, Adv.Ms. Anisha Mahajan, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RExemption from filing O.T. is allowed.Issue notice on the appeals as well as on the application forstay returnable in two weeks.Tag with Civil Appeal Nos. 6119-6148 of 2015.(Meenakshi Kohli) (Shakti Parshad Sharma) Court Master Court Master
ITEM NO.13 COURT NO.5 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Civil Appeal No(s). 7152-7153/2016 SAHARA INDIA COMMERCIAL CORPORATION LIMITED Appellant(s) VERSUS SAHARA GRACE CONSUMER GRIEVANCES ASSOCIATION Respondent(s) (With appln. (s) for permission to file additional documents and stay and office report) Date : 05/08/2016 These appeals were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN B. LOKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. AGRAWAL For Appellant(s) Mr. Shyam Divan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar,Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Rohan Ahuja, Adv. Ms. Sonali Dhir, Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms. Vibha Datta Makhija, Sr. Adv. Mr. Rohan Thawani, Adv. Ms. Vandana Sehgal,Adv. Mr. Hardeep Singh Anand, Adv. Mr. Anand Daga, Adv. Ms. Anisha Mahajan, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List the matters on 08.08.2016. Paper books in Civil Appeal No. 6044 of 2015 and Civil Appeal Nos. 6119-6148 of 2015 be sent along with these matters for perusal. (Meenakshi Kohli) (Raj Rani Negi) Court Master Court Master
SECTION XVII IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 7152-7153 OF 2016 with INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NOS. 3-4,5-6,7-8 and 9-10 OF 2016 (Application for permission to file additional documents ,Stay and permission to file additional documents along with exemption from filing official translation) Sahara India Commercial Corporation Limited ...Appellant Versus Sahara Grace Consumer Greivances Association & Etc. ...Respondents OFFICE REPORT The matters above mentioned have been filed under Section 23 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the Common judgment and order dated 11.08.2015 of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi in Consumer Complaint No. 47 of 2009 and 77 of 2008 respectively. Delay of 268 days in re-filing the appeal was condoned vide Court's order dated 25.07.2016. It is submitted that in terms of Section 23 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as amended, the appellant has deposited the amount of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) and the same was deposited in Suitors' Fund and will not bear any interest. It is further submitted that Civil Appeal Nos. 6119-6148 of 2015 (connected with Main Appeal No. 6044 of 2015) filed against order dated 08.06.2015 in Consumer Complaint No. 427 of 2014 etc. referred at Annexure A-4 relating to the issue of delayed posession is pending before this Hon'ble Court and this Hon'ble Court on 17.08.2015 was pleased to issue notice. (Copy of Record of Proceeding is enclosed herewith) It is lastly submitted that Counsel for the appellant has on 30.07.2016 filed application for permission to file additional documents and exemption from filing official translation along with affidavit and the same are registered as I.A. Nos. 7-8 and 9-10 of 2016. (Copies are circulated herewith) The matter above-mentioned is listed before the Hon'ble Court with this office report. DATED THIS THE 03rd DAY OF AUGUST, 2016. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Copy to : Mr. Gautam Talukdar , Advocate Ms. Vandana Sehgal, Advocate ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
°ITEM NO.13 COURT NO.5 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSCivil Appeal No(s). 7152-7153/2016SAHARA INDIA COMMERCIAL CORPORATION LIMITED Appellant(s) VERSUSSAHARA GRACE CONSUMER GRIEVANCES ASSOCIATION Respondent(s)(With appln. (s) for permission to file additional documents andstay and office report)Date : 05/08/2016 These appeals were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN B. LOKURHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. AGRAWALFor Appellant(s) Mr. Shyam Divan, Sr. Adv.Mr. Gautam Talukdar,Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv.Mr. Rohan Ahuja, Adv.Ms. Sonali Dhir, Adv.For Respondent(s) Ms. Vibha Datta Makhija, Sr. Adv.Mr. Rohan Thawani, Adv.Ms. Vandana Sehgal,Adv. Mr. Hardeep Singh Anand, Adv.Mr. Anand Daga, Adv.Ms. Anisha Mahajan, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RList the matters on 08.08.2016.Paper books in Civil Appeal No. 6044 of 2015 and Civil AppealNos. 6119-6148 of 2015 be sent along with these matters forperusal.(Meenakshi Kohli) (Raj Rani Negi) Court Master Court Master
1 ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. Nos. 83-85/2015, I.A. Nos. 104-106/2016, I.A. Nos. 180-182/2015, I.A.NOS. 194-195/2016 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (For directions, impleadment and intervention, appropriate orders, intervention and provisional release and office report) WITH CONMT.PET.(C) No. 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9833/2011 (With appln.(s) for stay and Office Report) CONMT.PET.(C) No. 260/2013 In C.A. No. 8643/2012 Date : 03/08/2016 These applications were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Shekhar Napahade, Sr.Adv. (AC) Ms. Shubangi Tuli, Adv. Mr. Vikram Sobti, Adv. Mr. Arvind P.Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Purushottam Kumar, Adv. Mr. Anuj Sarma, Adv. Ms. Niharika, Adv. Mr. Aman Shukla, Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv.
2 For Respondent(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. No. 5 Mr. Narendra Hooda, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Ayush Chaudhary, Adv. Mr. Nizam Pasha, Adv. Mr. Simranjit Singh, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv. Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav, adv. Mr. Aarohi Bhalla, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Jain, Adv. Mr. Salim Inamdar, Adv. Mr. Sarthak Nayak, Adv. Mr. Aviral Dhirendra, Adv. IA 188-189 Mr. Biswajit Bhatatcharya, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pawan Upadhayay, Adv. MR. Sarvjit Pratap Singh, Adv. Ms. Sharmila Upadhayay, Adv. I.A.83-85 Mr. Tushar Mehta, ASG, Mr. S.Gurukrishna Kumar, Sr. Adv. Mr. D.L.Chidananda, Adv. Ms. Sadhna Sandhu, Adv. Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv. Ms. Anil Katiyar, Adv. I.A.194-195/16 Mr. Shyam Divan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Ashish Prasad, Adv. Ms. Mukta Dutta, Adv. Mr. Avinash Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Anit Anand Tiwari, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Sujit Keshri, Adv. For RBI Ms. Swati Setia, Adv. Mr. Ramesh Babu M. R.,Adv. . I.A.144-146 Mr. Sunil Fernandes,Adv. Ms. Astha Sharma, Adv. Mr. Pueneth K.G., Adv. I.A.177-179 Mr. Gopal Jain, Sr.Adv. Mr. Amitabh Chaturvedi, Adv. Ms. Rakhi Ray,Adv.
3 Mr. Sameer Vashishit, Adv. Dr.(Mrs.) Vipin Gupta,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Mr. Arvind P. Datar, learned senior counsel appearing for SEBI today submits that SEBI has received a further sum of Rs. Three hundred crores and sixty eight lacs (Rs. 300.68 crores) from Saharas pursuant to the previous orders of this Court. He further states that SEBI has through the agency engaged by it already sold eight properties for a total sum of Rs. One hundred ninety five crores and seven lacs (Rs. 195.07 crores). He submits that a second round of auction for the remaining properties can be conducted if so directed by this Court. Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel appearing for the contemnors on the other hand submits that the properties are being sold for a price less than the market value and that some of the properties now being offered for sale could be sold at a minimum of 110% of the prescribed circle rate. He submits that he is ready to intimate to the SEBI particulars of such of the properties as can be sold at the said rate and in regard to which the Saharas have a firm offer from a willing purchaser. He submits that any such intimation ought to result in that particular item of property being taken off the E-platform. Mr. Datar has no difficulty with that proposal being accepted subject to the condition that the intimation is made within ten days from today and the firm offer referred to therein is supported by deposit with Saharas of 10% of
4 the sale price offered for the property. In that view, therefore, we allow SEBI to undertake the second round of auction on E-platform, if necessary, after excluding the properties about which the Saharas may send an intimation to SEBI within ten days from today. It is made clear that such an intimation shall be honoured by Saharas only in case the intimation contains a specific statement to the effect that the prospective purchaser of the properties in question has deposited with Saharas at least 10% of the purchase price of the property sought to be sold to him. Mr. Sibal has today filed an affidavit sworn by Subrata Roy Sahara inter alia stating that the Saharas have negotiated sale of four properties situate at different locations for a total sale consideration of Rs. Two hundred eighty one crores apart from six other properties which are proposed to be sold by Saharas for a sum of Rs. One hundred eighty crores. The affidavit further states that Saharas have received token amount towards advance in regard to the said sales. In the affidavit, the deponent undertakes to deposit a minimum of Rs. Two hundred crores by the 1 st week of September, 2016. Mr. Sibal submits that the interim arrangement made by this Court in terms of our previous orders could continue till the next date of hearing subject to deposit of Rs. Two hundred crores during the intervening period. The Saharas claim to have negotiated sale for a total value of Rs. Four hundred sixty one crores. We see no reason why the Saharas should not finalise the transactions before the next date of hearing and deposit the entire sale consideration with SEBI. Mr. Sibal however submits that instead of this Court fixing a
5 higher amount for deposit, the existing arrangement could continue subject to deposit of a sum of Rs Two hundred crores only as proposed in the affidavit. We are of the view that deposit of a sum of Rs. Three hundred crores should suffice. We accordingly extend the interim arrangement made in terms of our previous order till 16.09.2016 subject to the condition that the Saharas deposit during the intervening period a minimum sum of Rs. Three hundred crores in SEBI Sahara Account. Saharas shall also be entitled to sell moveable properties owned by them subject to the condition that the entire sale consideration received by them is deposited in SEBI Sahara Account and the list of the properties so sold and the consideration received against the same is filed in this Court. Post on Friday i.e. 16.09.2016 at 2.00 P.M. (Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
<1ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSI.A. Nos. 83-85/2015, I.A. Nos. 104-106/2016, I.A. Nos.180-182/2015, I.A.NOS. 194-195/2016 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(For directions, impleadment and intervention, appropriate orders,intervention and provisional release and office report)WITHCONMT.PET.(C) No. 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9833/2011(With appln.(s) for stay and Office Report)CONMT.PET.(C) No. 260/2013 In C.A. No. 8643/2012 Date : 03/08/2016 These applications were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRIFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Shekhar Napahade, Sr.Adv. (AC) Ms. Shubangi Tuli, Adv. Mr. Vikram Sobti, Adv. Mr. Arvind P.Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Purushottam Kumar, Adv. Mr. Anuj Sarma, Adv. Ms. Niharika, Adv. Mr. Aman Shukla, Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv.2For Respondent(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv.No. 5 Mr. Narendra Hooda, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Ayush Chaudhary, Adv. Mr. Nizam Pasha, Adv. Mr. Simranjit Singh, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv. Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav, adv. Mr. Aarohi Bhalla, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Jain, Adv. Mr. Salim Inamdar, Adv. Mr. Sarthak Nayak, Adv. Mr. Aviral Dhirendra, Adv.IA 188-189 Mr. Biswajit Bhatatcharya, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pawan Upadhayay, Adv. MR. Sarvjit Pratap Singh, Adv. Ms. Sharmila Upadhayay, Adv.I.A.83-85 Mr. Tushar Mehta, ASG, Mr. S.Gurukrishna Kumar, Sr. Adv. Mr. D.L.Chidananda, Adv. Ms. Sadhna Sandhu, Adv. Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv. Ms. Anil Katiyar, Adv.I.A.194-195/16 Mr. Shyam Divan, Sr. Adv.Mr. Ashish Prasad, Adv.Ms. Mukta Dutta, Adv.Mr. Avinash Tripathi, Adv.Mr. Anit Anand Tiwari, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv.
Mr. Sujit Keshri, Adv.For RBI Ms. Swati Setia, Adv.Mr. Ramesh Babu M. R.,Adv. .I.A.144-146 Mr. Sunil Fernandes,Adv.Ms. Astha Sharma, Adv.Mr. Pueneth K.G., Adv.I.A.177-179 Mr. Gopal Jain, Sr.Adv.Mr. Amitabh Chaturvedi, Adv. Ms. Rakhi Ray,Adv.3 Mr. Sameer Vashishit, Adv. Dr.(Mrs.) Vipin Gupta,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Mr. Arvind P. Datar, learned senior counsel appearing forSEBI today submits that SEBI has received a further sum of Rs.Three hundred crores and sixty eight lacs (Rs. 300.68 crores) fromSaharas pursuant to the previous orders of this Court. He furtherstates that SEBI has through the agency engaged by it already soldeight properties for a total sum of Rs. One hundred ninety fivecrores and seven lacs (Rs. 195.07 crores). He submits that asecond round of auction for the remaining properties can beconducted if so directed by this Court. Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel appearing for thecontemnors on the other hand submits that the properties are beingsold for a price less than the market value and that some of theproperties now being offered for sale could be sold at a minimum of110% of the prescribed circle rate. He submits that he is ready tointimate to the SEBI particulars of such of the properties as canbe sold at the said rate and in regard to which the Saharas have afirm offer from a willing purchaser. He submits that any suchintimation ought to result in that particular item of propertybeing taken off the E-platform. Mr. Datar has no difficulty withthat proposal being accepted subject to the condition that theintimation is made within ten days from today and the firm offerreferred to therein is supported by deposit with Saharas of 10% of4the sale price offered for the property. In that view, therefore,we allow SEBI to undertake the second round of auction onE-platform, if necessary, after excluding the properties aboutwhich the Saharas may send an intimation to SEBI within ten daysfrom today. It is made clear that such an intimation shall behonoured by Saharas only in case the intimation contains a specificstatement to the effect that the prospective purchaser of theproperties in question has deposited with Saharas at least 10% ofthe purchase price of the property sought to be sold to him. Mr. Sibal has today filed an affidavit sworn by Subrata RoySahara inter alia stating that the Saharas have negotiated sale offour properties situate at different locations for a total saleconsideration of Rs. Two hundred eighty one crores apart from sixother properties which are proposed to be sold by Saharas for a sumof Rs. One hundred eighty crores. The affidavit further statesthat Saharas have received token amount towards advance in regardto the said sales. In the affidavit, the deponent undertakes todeposit a minimum of Rs. Two hundred crores by the 1 st week ofSeptember, 2016. Mr. Sibal submits that the interim arrangementmade by this Court in terms of our previous orders could continuetill the next date of hearing subject to deposit of Rs. Twohundred crores during the intervening period.The Saharas claim to have negotiated sale for a total valueof Rs. Four hundred sixty one crores. We see no reason why theSaharas should not finalise the transactions before the next dateof hearing and deposit the entire sale consideration with SEBI.
Mr. Sibal however submits that instead of this Court fixing a5higher amount for deposit, the existing arrangement could continuesubject to deposit of a sum of Rs Two hundred crores only asproposed in the affidavit. We are of the view that deposit of a sum of Rs. Three hundredcrores should suffice. We accordingly extend the interimarrangement made in terms of our previous order till 16.09.2016subject to the condition that the Saharas deposit during theintervening period a minimum sum of Rs. Three hundred crores inSEBI Sahara Account.Saharas shall also be entitled to sell moveable propertiesowned by them subject to the condition that the entire saleconsideration received by them is deposited in SEBI Sahara Accountand the list of the properties so sold and the considerationreceived against the same is filed in this Court.Post on Friday i.e. 16.09.2016 at 2.00 P.M.(Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
ITEM NO.21 COURT NO.4 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Civil Appeal Diary No(s). 1028/2016 SAHARA GRACE CONSUMERS GRIEVANCE ASSOCIATION Appellant(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA COMMERCIAL CORPORATION LTD. Respondent(s) (Office report on default) Date : 02/08/2016 This appeal was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. NAGAPPAN [IN CHAMBERS] For Appellant(s) Mr. Anand Daga,Adv. Ms. Vandana Sehgal,Adv. Mr. Hardeep Singh Anand,Adv. Ms. Anisha Mahajan,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has cured the defects and has refiled the matter in the Registry today along with the application for condonation of delay in curing the defects. Registry to verify and put up the application for condonation of delay in curing the defects. (SAPNA BISHT) SR.P.A. (SHARDA KAPOOR) COURT MASTER
ªITEM NO.21 COURT NO.4 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSCivil Appeal Diary No(s). 1028/2016SAHARA GRACE CONSUMERS GRIEVANCE ASSOCIATION Appellant(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA COMMERCIAL CORPORATION LTD. Respondent(s)(Office report on default)Date : 02/08/2016 This appeal was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. NAGAPPAN [IN CHAMBERS]For Appellant(s) Mr. Anand Daga,Adv. Ms. Vandana Sehgal,Adv. Mr. Hardeep Singh Anand,Adv. Ms. Anisha Mahajan,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RLearned counsel for the petitioner submits that he hascured the defects and has refiled the matter in theRegistry today along with the application for condonationof delay in curing the defects.Registry to verify and put up the application forcondonation of delay in curing the defects.(SAPNA BISHT)SR.P.A. (SHARDA KAPOOR) COURT MASTER
ITEM NO.804 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A.Nos.194-195/2016 CONMT.PET.(C)No.412-413/2012 In C.A.Nos.9813/2011 & 9833 of 2011 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD. & ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 28/07/2016 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. NAGESWARA RAO For Petitioner(s)/Applicant(s) Mr. Avinash Tiwari,Adv. Ms. Mukta Dutta,Adv. Mr. Amit Anand Tiwari,Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. Ms. Sujata Kurdukar,Adv. Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh,Adv. For Respondent(s)/Contemnor(s) Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. SEBI M/s. K.J. John & Co.,Advs. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List the matters on 3 rd August, 2016, before an appropriate Bench. (Sarita Purohit) (Sneh Bala Mehra ) Court Master Assistant Registrar
ÂITEM NO.804 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSI.A.Nos.194-195/2016 CONMT.PET.(C)No.412-413/2012 In C.A.Nos.9813/2011 & 9833 of 2011SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD. & ORS. Respondent(s)Date : 28/07/2016 These matters were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. NAGESWARA RAOFor Petitioner(s)/Applicant(s)Mr. Avinash Tiwari,Adv.Ms. Mukta Dutta,Adv.Mr. Amit Anand Tiwari,Adv.Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv.Ms. Sujata Kurdukar,Adv.Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh,Adv. For Respondent(s)/Contemnor(s)Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv.SEBI M/s. K.J. John & Co.,Advs. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RList the matters on 3 rd August, 2016, before anappropriate Bench. (Sarita Purohit) (Sneh Bala Mehra ) Court Master Assistant Registrar
ITEM NO.1 COURT NO.8 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. 1-2/2016 in Civil Appeal Diary No(s). 30268/2015 SAHARA INDIA COMMERCIAL CORPORATION LIMITED Appellant(s) VERSUS SAHARA GRACE CONSUMER GRIEVANCES ASSOCIATION Respondent(s) (For c/delay in re-filing appeal and office report) Date : 25/07/2016 These applications were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL [IN CHAMBERS] For Appellant(s) Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv. Mr. Rohan Ahuja, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Rohan Thawani, Adv. Ms. Vandana Sehgal, Adv. Mr. Hardeep Singh Anand, Adv. Ms. Anisha Mahajan, Adv. Mr. Anand Daga, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay of 268 days in refiling the Civil appeal is condoned. (RASHI GUPTA) (SUMAN JAIN) SR. P.A. COURT MASTER
ITEM NO.1 COURT NO.8 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. 1-2/2016 in Civil Appeal Diary No(s). 30268/2015 SAHARA INDIA COMMERCIAL CORPORATION LIMITED Appellant(s) VERSUS SAHARA GRACE CONSUMER GRIEVANCES ASSOCIATION Respondent(s) (For c/delay in re-filing appeal and office report) Date : 25/07/2016 These applications were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL [IN CHAMBERS] For Appellant(s) Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv. Mr. Rohan Ahuja, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Rohan Thawani, Adv. Ms. Vandana Sehgal, Adv. Mr. Hardeep Singh Anand, Adv. Ms. Anisha Mahajan, Adv. Mr. Anand Daga, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay of 268 days in refiling the Civil appeal is condoned. (RASHI GUPTA) (SUMAN JAIN) SR. P.A. COURT MASTERSignature Not VerifiedDigitally signed byRASHI GUPTADate: 2016.07.2813:01:38 ISTReason:
1 ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII (Part-Heard) S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A.NOS. 77-79, 89-91, 104-106, 83-85, 144-146, 158-160, 161-163, 168-170, 171-173, 174-176/2016, 177-179/2016, 132-134/2015, 138-140/2016, 141-143/2016 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412 & 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9813 & 9833/2011 AND C.P.(C) NO.260/2013 IN C.A.NO.8643/2012 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (for directions and appropriate orders and impleadment and intervention and placing on record of additional facts and documents and exemption from filing O.T. and office report) (I.A. Nos. 180-182 of 2015 (Appln. for provisional release) (I.A. Nos. 185-187 & 188-189 of 2016 (Appln. For appropriate directions and directions) Date : 11/07/2016 These applications were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Shekhar Napahade, Sr.Adv. (AC) Ms. Shubangi Tuli, Adv. Mr. Vikram Sobti, Adv. Mr. Arvind P.Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Purushottam Kumar, Adv. MR. Anuj Sarma, Adv. Ms. Niharika, Adv. Mr. Aman Shukla, Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv.
2 For Respondent(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. No. 5 Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Ayush Chaudhary, Adv. Mr. Nizam Pasha, Adv. Mr. Simranjit Singh, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv. Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav, adv. Mr. Aarohi Bhalla, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv. IA 190-191/16 Mr. Ratnakar Das, Sr. Adv. Mr. G.Sivabalamurugan, Adv. MS. Vandana, Adv. Mr. Anis Mohd., Adv. IA 188-189 Mr. Biswajit Bhatatcharya, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pawan Upadhayay, Adv. MR. Sarvjit Pratap Singh, Adv. MR. Aakash Tyagi, Adv. Ms. Sharmila Upadhayay, Adv. Mr. Tushar Mehta, ASG, Mr. D.L.Chidananda, Adv. Ms. Sadhna Sandhu, adv. Mr. Rajat Nair, adv. Ms. Anil Katiyar, Adv. IA 135-137 Mr. Paras Kuhad, Sr. Adv. Mr. Omkar Geedh, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Agrawal,Adv. MR. Jitin Chaturvedi, Adv. MS. Swati Vijay Vargiya, Adv. MS. Aditi Triathi, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. For RBI Ms. Swati Setia, Adv. Mr. Ramesh Babu M. R.,Adv. . Mr. Sunil Fernandes,Adv. MS. Astha Sharma, Adv. Ms. Rakhi Ray,Adv. Mr. Sameer Vashishit, Adv. Dr.(Mrs.) Vipin Gupta,Adv.
3 UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R By our Order dated 11.05.2016, we had extended the interim arrangement made by under our Order dated 06.05.2016 till 11.07.2016 subject to the contemnors-Subrata Roy Sahara and Ashok Roy Choudhary depositing an additional sum of Rs. Two hundred crores by 11.07.2016. In the event of their failure to do so, the police escort team, in whose protective custody they have been placed, was directed to take them back to Tihar jail for being lodged there. Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel appearing for the contemnors has today handed over to Mr.Arvind Datar, learned senior counsel appearing for SEBI six different bank drafts- five drawn on Union Bank of India and one on Punjab National Bank for a total sum of Rs. Two hundred crores in compliance with the direction mentioned above. Mr. Sibal submits that given time till 03.08.2016, the contemnors would deposit a further sum of Rs. Three hundred crores for continuance of the interim arrangement made in terms of our Orders dated 6 th and 11 th May, 2016. Mr. Datar, learned senior counsel appearing for SEBI and Mr. Shekhar Naphade, learned Amicus Curiae have no serious objection to the time prayed for being granted on the condition that the Saharas shall during the intervening period deposit a further sum of Rs. Three hundred crores with SEBI in the SEBI Sahara account. In that view, therefore, we continue the
4 arrangement made in terms of the orders mentioned above till 03.08.2016 subject to the deposit of an additional amount of Rs. Three hundred crores by 03.08.2016. Needless to say, that in case the needful is not done within the time allowed, the two contemnors mentioned above shall be sent back to custody in Tihar jail as already directed. Mr. Sibal next submitted that certain directions have been issued by this Court earlier enabling the SEBI to collect certain amount due to Saharas in National Spot Exchange Limited. He submits that the amount payable by Saharas towards mutual funds and shares have not so far been recovered by SEBI despite the directions of this Court. Mr. Datar, however, submits that SEBI has taken steps in that direction and a status report regarding the progress made shall be filed by the next date of hearing. We make it clear that the direction for deposit of Rs. three hundred crores by Saharas by 03.08.2016 shall remain independent of the collection which SEBI may make pursuant to the directions already issued. Mr. Sibal then argued that although this Court has permitted the Saharas to sell 19 different items of properties apart from three off-shore hotels and also to mortgage Ambey Valley to raise funds in terms of the directions of this Court, yet not much has been achieved in that direction on account of the conditions stipulated by this Court for such sale. He urged that this Court could in modification of the conditions stipulated earlier permit Saharas to sell the afore-mentioned properties and all other properties owned by Saharas on the same terms and conditions as were prescribed while committing SEBI to sell the
5 property. It was submitted that SEBI has been permitted by this Court to sell properties identified for such sale at a price not less than 90% of the circle value of the properties in terms of our Order dated 29.03.2013. M/s.Arvind Datar and Shekhar Naphade have no objection to such permission being granted having regard to the fact that the process of sale of the properties even through SEBI has not yielded any result. In the circumstances, we modify our order issued earlier and permit Saharas to sell the properties owned by them subject to the condition that such sales are not for a price less than 90% of the circle rates stipulated for the area in which the properties are situate. Needless to say, that the sale price so recovered by Saharas shall be deposited in entirety less expenses, TDS and all other applicable taxes in the SEBI Sahara Account. At this stage Mr. Ratnakar Das, learned senior counsel for the applicant in I.As. No. 190-191 of 2016 points out that one of the properties which the Saharas owns is situate at Coimbatore and has been developed in the name and style of Sahara City Homes. He submits that the applicants have purchased flats in the said developed area which spreads over a total extent of 12.28 acres out of a total area of 112.14 acres owned by Saharas. He submits that the permission granted by this Court should not jeoparize the interest of the applicants in the said developed colony. We accordingly make it clear that this permission shall not authorise the sale of 12.28 acres of land developed in the name and style of Sahara City Homes at Coimbatore. We however direct that the Saharas shall keep SEBI informed about the transactions entered
6 into by them and the terms on which the same have been made. Mr. Sibal submits that a sum of Rs. 24 million pounds equivalent to Rs. Two hundred crores approximately is lying in Saharas account in a London Bank which the Saharas wishe to transfer to SEBI in discharge of their liability. He submits that the Saharas could be allowed to make the said transfer. Mr. Datar in reply submits that any amount transferred by Saharas can be received by SEBI for adjustment towards their liability. In the circumstances, therefore, we permit the Saharas to transfer the amount mentioned above to SEBI Sahara Account. Mr. Sibal at this stage submits that the third contemnor Mr. Ravi Shankar Dubey could also be let off on the same terms and conditions as stipulated for the release of other two contemnors. Learned counsel for the opposite parties do not oppose that prayer and submit that in case the conditions stipulated by this Court regarding deposit of the amount are not complied with, all the three contemnors shall be liable to be sent back to jail. We make it clear that the release of Mr. Dubey from jail will also be subject to the very same conditions as stipulated in regard to other two contemnors. Mr. Paras Kuhad, learned senior counsel appearing for the Directors in Sai Rydam Realtors Private Limited- contemnors in I.A. Nos. 135-137 of 2015 submits that the contemnors namely M/s. Devendra Rajnikant Ladhani, Anil Ramchandra Gupta and Mukesh Shivdaas Sonar have filed an undertaking unconditionally undertaking to deposit the balance amount of Rs. 982.80/- crores in two equal instalments. The first instalment of Rs. 491.40 crores
7 shall be deposited by 30.11.2016 whereas the second instalment shall be deposited on or before 15.03.2017. He submits that the undertaking furnished by the contemnors could be accepted and time prayed for making the deposit granted to them. We see no reason to decline that prayer. We accordingly accept the undertaking given by the contemnors and direct that the proceedings initiated by this Court in terms of our Order dated 29.03.2016 shall stand dropped for the present subject to the contemnors mentioned above complying with the undertaking filed by them today. I.As. No. 135-137 of 2015 which were reserved for orders shall accordingly stand disposed off. The personal presence of the Directors of the company is dispensed with. Keeping in view the difficulties and impediments that have been faced for effecting the recovery of the amount due from Saharas, we proposed to hear the applications for appointment of receiver moved by SEBI but Mr. Sibal sought time till 03.08.2016 to take instructions and argue the matter. We therefore direct that I.A. No. 104-106 of 2016 shall be listed for hearing on 03.08.2016 along with I.As. No. 83-85 of 2015. I.A. Nos. 161-163 of 2016 : SEBI has sought permission to make refunds to such of the bondholders as have produced original bonds before SEBI for refund. Mr. Sibal, learned counsel submits that so long as the original bonds are verified, and the receipient of the money are duly identified and the payment of amount is made by Account Payee
8 cheque to them, there should be no difficulty in disbursing the bond amounts. We accordingly allow I.As. No. 161-163 of 2016 and permit the SEBI to disburse the amount cover by the bonds provided before it after verification and by way of cheques. (Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
¤d1ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII(Part-Heard) S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSI.A.NOS. 77-79, 89-91, 104-106, 83-85, 144-146, 158-160, 161-163,168-170, 171-173, 174-176/2016, 177-179/2016, 132-134/2015,138-140/2016, 141-143/2016 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412 & 413/2012 InC.A. No. 9813 & 9833/2011 AND C.P.(C) NO.260/2013 INC.A.NO.8643/2012 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(for directions and appropriate orders and impleadment andintervention and placing on record of additional facts anddocuments and exemption from filing O.T. and office report)(I.A. Nos. 180-182 of 2015 (Appln. for provisional release)(I.A. Nos. 185-187 & 188-189 of 2016 (Appln. For appropriatedirections and directions)Date : 11/07/2016 These applications were called on for hearingtoday.CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRIFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Shekhar Napahade, Sr.Adv. (AC) Ms. Shubangi Tuli, Adv. Mr. Vikram Sobti, Adv. Mr. Arvind P.Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Purushottam Kumar, Adv. MR. Anuj Sarma, Adv. Ms. Niharika, Adv. Mr. Aman Shukla, Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv.2For Respondent(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv.No. 5 Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Ayush Chaudhary, Adv. Mr. Nizam Pasha, Adv. Mr. Simranjit Singh, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv. Mr. Ram Sajan Yadav, adv. Mr. Aarohi Bhalla, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv.IA 190-191/16 Mr. Ratnakar Das, Sr. Adv. Mr. G.Sivabalamurugan, Adv. MS. Vandana, Adv. Mr. Anis Mohd., Adv.IA 188-189 Mr. Biswajit Bhatatcharya, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pawan Upadhayay, Adv. MR. Sarvjit Pratap Singh, Adv. MR. Aakash Tyagi, Adv. Ms. Sharmila Upadhayay, Adv. Mr. Tushar Mehta, ASG, Mr. D.L.Chidananda, Adv. Ms. Sadhna Sandhu, adv. Mr. Rajat Nair, adv. Ms. Anil Katiyar, Adv.IA 135-137 Mr. Paras Kuhad, Sr. Adv. Mr. Omkar Geedh, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Agrawal,Adv. MR. Jitin Chaturvedi, Adv. MS. Swati Vijay Vargiya, Adv.
MS. Aditi Triathi, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. For RBI Ms. Swati Setia, Adv. Mr. Ramesh Babu M. R.,Adv. . Mr. Sunil Fernandes,Adv. MS. Astha Sharma, Adv. Ms. Rakhi Ray,Adv. Mr. Sameer Vashishit, Adv. Dr.(Mrs.) Vipin Gupta,Adv.3 UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R By our Order dated 11.05.2016, we had extended theinterim arrangement made by under our Order dated 06.05.2016 till11.07.2016 subject to the contemnors-Subrata Roy Sahara and AshokRoy Choudhary depositing an additional sum of Rs. Two hundredcrores by 11.07.2016. In the event of their failure to do so, thepolice escort team, in whose protective custody they have beenplaced, was directed to take them back to Tihar jail for beinglodged there. Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel appearingfor the contemnors has today handed over to Mr.Arvind Datar,learned senior counsel appearing for SEBI six different bankdrafts- five drawn on Union Bank of India and one on PunjabNational Bank for a total sum of Rs. Two hundred crores incompliance with the direction mentioned above. Mr. Sibal submitsthat given time till 03.08.2016, the contemnors would deposit afurther sum of Rs. Three hundred crores for continuance of theinterim arrangement made in terms of our Orders dated 6 th and 11 thMay, 2016. Mr. Datar, learned senior counsel appearing for SEBI andMr. Shekhar Naphade, learned Amicus Curiae have no seriousobjection to the time prayed for being granted on the conditionthat the Saharas shall during the intervening period deposit afurther sum of Rs. Three hundred crores with SEBI in the SEBISahara account. In that view, therefore, we continue the4arrangement made in terms of the orders mentioned above till03.08.2016 subject to the deposit of an additional amount of Rs.Three hundred crores by 03.08.2016. Needless to say, that in casethe needful is not done within the time allowed, the two contemnorsmentioned above shall be sent back to custody in Tihar jail asalready directed. Mr. Sibal next submitted that certain directions havebeen issued by this Court earlier enabling the SEBI to collectcertain amount due to Saharas in National Spot Exchange Limited.He submits that the amount payable by Saharas towards mutual fundsand shares have not so far been recovered by SEBI despite thedirections of this Court. Mr. Datar, however, submits that SEBIhas taken steps in that direction and a status report regarding theprogress made shall be filed by the next date of hearing. We makeit clear that the direction for deposit of Rs. three hundred croresby Saharas by 03.08.2016 shall remain independent of the collectionwhich SEBI may make pursuant to the directions already issued. Mr. Sibal then argued that although this Court haspermitted the Saharas to sell 19 different items of propertiesapart from three off-shore hotels and also to mortgage Ambey Valleyto raise funds in terms of the directions of this Court, yet notmuch has been achieved in that direction on account of theconditions stipulated by this Court for such sale. He urged thatthis Court could in modification of the conditions stipulatedearlier permit Saharas to sell the afore-mentioned properties andall other properties owned by Saharas on the same terms andconditions as were prescribed while committing SEBI to sell the
5property. It was submitted that SEBI has been permitted by thisCourt to sell properties identified for such sale at a price notless than 90% of the circle value of the properties in terms ofour Order dated 29.03.2013.M/s.Arvind Datar and Shekhar Naphade have no objection tosuch permission being granted having regard to the fact that theprocess of sale of the properties even through SEBI has not yieldedany result. In the circumstances, we modify our order issuedearlier and permit Saharas to sell the properties owned by themsubject to the condition that such sales are not for a price lessthan 90% of the circle rates stipulated for the area in which theproperties are situate. Needless to say, that the sale price sorecovered by Saharas shall be deposited in entirety less expenses,TDS and all other applicable taxes in the SEBI Sahara Account. At this stage Mr. Ratnakar Das, learned senior counselfor the applicant in I.As. No. 190-191 of 2016 points out that oneof the properties which the Saharas owns is situate at Coimbatoreand has been developed in the name and style of Sahara City Homes.He submits that the applicants have purchased flats in the saiddeveloped area which spreads over a total extent of 12.28 acres outof a total area of 112.14 acres owned by Saharas. He submits thatthe permission granted by this Court should not jeoparize theinterest of the applicants in the said developed colony. Weaccordingly make it clear that this permission shall not authorisethe sale of 12.28 acres of land developed in the name and style ofSahara City Homes at Coimbatore. We however direct that theSaharas shall keep SEBI informed about the transactions entered6into by them and the terms on which the same have been made. Mr. Sibal submits that a sum of Rs. 24 million poundsequivalent to Rs. Two hundred crores approximately is lying inSaharas account in a London Bank which the Saharas wishe totransfer to SEBI in discharge of their liability. He submits thatthe Saharas could be allowed to make the said transfer. Mr. Datar in reply submits that any amount transferred bySaharas can be received by SEBI for adjustment towards theirliability. In the circumstances, therefore, we permit the Saharasto transfer the amount mentioned above to SEBI Sahara Account. Mr. Sibal at this stage submits that the third contemnorMr. Ravi Shankar Dubey could also be let off on the same terms andconditions as stipulated for the release of other two contemnors.Learned counsel for the opposite parties do not oppose that prayerand submit that in case the conditions stipulated by this Courtregarding deposit of the amount are not complied with, all thethree contemnors shall be liable to be sent back to jail. We makeit clear that the release of Mr. Dubey from jail will also besubject to the very same conditions as stipulated in regard toother two contemnors.Mr. Paras Kuhad, learned senior counsel appearing for theDirectors in Sai Rydam Realtors Private Limited- contemnors in I.A.Nos. 135-137 of 2015 submits that the contemnors namely M/s.Devendra Rajnikant Ladhani, Anil Ramchandra Gupta and MukeshShivdaas Sonar have filed an undertaking unconditionallyundertaking to deposit the balance amount of Rs. 982.80/- crores intwo equal instalments. The first instalment of Rs. 491.40 crores7shall be deposited by 30.11.2016 whereas the second instalmentshall be deposited on or before 15.03.2017. He submits that theundertaking furnished by the contemnors could be accepted andtime prayed for making the deposit granted to them. We see noreason to decline that prayer. We accordingly accept theundertaking given by the contemnors and direct that the proceedingsinitiated by this Court in terms of our Order dated 29.03.2016shall stand dropped for the present subject to the contemnorsmentioned above complying with the undertaking filed by them today.I.As. No. 135-137 of 2015 which were reserved for orders shall
accordingly stand disposed off. The personal presence of theDirectors of the company is dispensed with.Keeping in view the difficulties and impediments that havebeen faced for effecting the recovery of the amount due fromSaharas, we proposed to hear the applications for appointment ofreceiver moved by SEBI but Mr. Sibal sought time till 03.08.2016 totake instructions and argue the matter. We therefore direct thatI.A. No. 104-106 of 2016 shall be listed for hearing on 03.08.2016along with I.As. No. 83-85 of 2015.I.A. Nos. 161-163 of 2016 : SEBI has sought permission to make refunds to such of thebondholders as have produced original bonds before SEBI forrefund. Mr. Sibal, learned counsel submits that so long as theoriginal bonds are verified, and the receipient of the money areduly identified and the payment of amount is made by Account Payee8cheque to them, there should be no difficulty in disbursing thebond amounts. We accordingly allow I.As. No. 161-163 of 2016 andpermit the SEBI to disburse the amount cover by the bonds providedbefore it after verification and by way of cheques.(Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
ITEM NO.806 + 814 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. No.______/2016 (for direction) IN CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 & 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 & C.A. No.9833/2011 and CONTMT. PET. (C) No.260 of 2013 in C.A. No.8643 of 2012 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (With office report) With I.A. No. /2016 (For direction) Date : 08/07/2016 These applications were mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKAR HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUD For Petitioner(s) (For Applicant (I.A. No..../2016) Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. (I.A.No...../2016) Ms. Sharmila Upadhyay, Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List these applications for direction along with the main matter on Monday, 11 th July, 2016 at 2.00 p.m. (Ashok Raj Singh) (Veena Khera) Court Master Court Master
æ ITEM NO.806 + 814 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. No.______/2016 (for direction) IN CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 & 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 & C.A. No.9833/2011 and CONTMT. PET. (C) No.260 of 2013 in C.A. No.8643 of 2012 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (With office report) With I.A. No. /2016 (For direction) Date : 08/07/2016 These applications were mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKAR HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUD For Petitioner(s) (For Applicant (I.A. No..../2016) Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. (I.A.No...../2016) Ms. Sharmila Upadhyay, Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List these applications for direction along with the main matter on Monday, 11th July, 2016 at 2.00 p.m.Signature Not Verified (Ashok Raj Singh) (Veena Khera)Digitally signed byASHOK RAJ SINGHDate: 2016.07.08 Court Master Court Master16:55:39 ISTReason:
1 ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A.NOS. 77-79, 89-91, 104-106, 83-85, 144-146, 158-160, 161-163, 168-170, 171-173, 174-176/2016, 177-179/2016, 132-134/2015, 138-140/2016, 141-143/2016, 135-137/2015 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412 & 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9813 & 9833/2011 AND C.P. (C)NO.260/2013 IN C.A.NO.8643/2012 No(s). S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (For directions and appropriate orders and impleadment and intervention and placing on record of additional facts and documents and exemption from filing O.T. and office report) Date : 11/05/2016 These applications were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Shekhar Napahade, Sr.Adv. (A.C.) Ms. Shubhangi Tuli, Adv. Mr. Vikram Sobti, Adv. Mr. Arvind P.Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, adv. MS. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Purushottam Kumar Jha, Adv. Mr. Anuj Sarma, Adv. MS. Niharika, Adv. Mr. Aman Shukla, Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, Sr. Adv. Mr. S.Ganesh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, adv. Mr. Nikhil Jain, adv.
2 Mr. Ayush Choudhary, adv. MS. Preeti Singh, adv. Mr. Abhinav Mani Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Nijam Pasha, Adv. Mr. Salim Inamdar, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv. Mr. Kumar Ayush, adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Mr. R.S.Yadav, Adv. Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, adv. Mr.Sujit Keshri, Adv. CP(C) 412-413 Dr. A.M. Singhvi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sanjib Sen, Sr. Adv. Mr. Amitabh Chaturvedi, Adv. Mr. Sumit Shukla, Adv. Ms. Rakhi Ray,Adv. Mr. Sanjib Sen, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gopal Jain, Sr. Adv. Mr. Amitabh Chaturvedi, Adv. MS. Rakhi Ray, Adv. For UOI Mr. Tushar Mehta, ASG, Mr. S.Gurukrishna Kumar, Sr. Adv. Mr. D.L.Chidananda, Adv. MS. Sadhna Sandhu, Adv. MR. Rajat Nair, Adv. Ms. Anil Katiyar, Adv. I.A 135-137 Mr. Paras Kuhad, Sr. Adv. Mr. Omkar Geedh, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Agrawal,Adv. Mr. Jitin Chaturvedi, adv. MS. Swati Vijay Vargiya, Adv. Mr. Ramesh Babu M. R.,Adv. Ms. Swati Setia, Adv. . Mr. Sunil Fernandes,Adv. Ms. Astha Sharma, Adv. Mr. Puneeth K.G., Adv. I.A 177-179 Mr.Sameer Vashisth, Adv. Dr.(Mrs.) Vipin Gupta,Adv.
3 UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R By our Order dated 06.05.2016 passed in I.As. No. 180-182 we had directed release of Subrata Roy Sahara and Ashok Roy Choudhary from Tihar jail for a period of four weeks to be held in protective custody by a team of police officials deputed by the Commissioner of Police. That order has been complied. Both Subrata Roy Sahara and Ashok Roy Choudhary are currently in Lucknow in connection with the death ceremonies of late Smt. Chhabi Roy, mother of Shri Subrata Roy Sahara. When the matter came up today, M/s. Subrata Roy Sahara and Ashok Roy Choudhary strenuously argued that given an opportunity, the aforementioned two contemnors would deposit a minimum amount of Rs. 200/- crores (Rupees Two hundred Crores only) with SEBI by the 11 th July, 2016 to prove their bonafides. Mr. Arvind Datar, learned senior counsel appearing for SEBI submits that if the applicants file individual undertakings to the effect that they shall deposit a sum of Rs. 200/- crores by the 11 th July, 2016, the arrangement made by us in terms of our Order dated 6 th May, 2016 could be extended till the 11 th July, 2016. It is submitted that from the list of properties filed today and situate within and outside the country, it appears that the Saharas are possessed of sufficiently large assets to enable them to raise for deposit with SEBI the requisite amount in terms of the earlier directions of this Court. Their omission to do so, however, suggests that they have no intentions of depositing the amount unless forced to do so. Be that as it may, so long as the Saharas
4 are ready to prove their bonafides by deposit of at least Rs. 200/- crores which is in comparison to the total amount liable to be deposited just about a fraction. They could be permitted to do so by extending the existing arrangement. Mr. Shekhar Naphade, learned Amicus submits that the reluctance of Saharas to sell Ambey Valley properties which are valuable and sufficient by themselves to fetch the requisite funds raises serious doubts about their bonafides. Having given our anxious consideration to the submissions made at the Bar, we are inclined to give one more chance to the applicants namely Subrata Roy Sahara and Ashok Roy Choudhary to prove their bonafides depositing Rs. 200/- crores by the 11 th July, 2016. We accordingly direct that the arrangement made in terms of our Order dated 6 th May, 2016 shall continue till 11 th July, 2016 subject to the following conditions: 1) Subroto Roy Sahara and Ashok Roy Choudhary file individual undertakings in this Court within one week from today to the effect that they shall deposit with SEBI a sum of Rs. 200/- crores by 11 th July, 2016. In case they fail to do so, the police escort team shall take them back to Tihar jail for being lodged there. 2) The process of sale of properties, title deeds whereof stand deposited with SEBI shall continue unaffected and shall have no co-relation with the obligation of the two applicants mentioned above to deposit Rs. 200/- crores by 11 th July, 2016. The applicants shall be free of visit under the care and protection of the escort team any place within the country provided they help the Commissioner of Police, Delhi informed about their
5 movements in advance. List of properties filed by Mr. Kapil Sibal is taken on record and shall be kept in a sealed cover by the Registry. Post on 11 th July, 2016 at 2 P.M. I.As. No. 135-137 of 2015 : Arguments heard. Judgment reserved. (Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
C 1 ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A.NOS. 77-79, 89-91, 104-106, 83-85, 144-146, 158-160, 161-163, 168-170, 171-173, 174-176/2016, 177-179/2016, 132-134/2015, 138-140/2016, 141-143/2016, 135-137/2015 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412 & 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9813 & 9833/2011 AND C.P. (C)NO.260/2013 IN C.A.NO.8643/2012 No(s). S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (For directions and appropriate orders and impleadment and intervention and placing on record of additional facts and documents and exemption from filing O.T. and office report) Date : 11/05/2016 These applications were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Shekhar Napahade, Sr.Adv. (A.C.) Ms. Shubhangi Tuli, Adv. Mr. Vikram Sobti, Adv. Mr. Arvind P.Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, adv. MS. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Purushottam Kumar Jha, Adv. Mr. Anuj Sarma, Adv. MS. Niharika, Adv. Mr. Aman Shukla, Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv.Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed by For Respondent(s)SHASHI SAREENDate: 2016.05.13 Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, Sr. Adv.14:39:43 ISTReason: Mr. S.Ganesh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, adv. Mr. Nikhil Jain, adv. 2 Mr. Ayush Choudhary, adv. MS. Preeti Singh, adv. Mr. Abhinav Mani Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Nijam Pasha, Adv. Mr. Salim Inamdar, Adv.
Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv. Mr. Kumar Ayush, adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Mr. R.S.Yadav, Adv. Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, adv. Mr.Sujit Keshri, Adv.CP(C) 412-413 Dr. A.M. Singhvi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sanjib Sen, Sr. Adv. Mr. Amitabh Chaturvedi, Adv. Mr. Sumit Shukla, Adv. Ms. Rakhi Ray,Adv. Mr. Sanjib Sen, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gopal Jain, Sr. Adv. Mr. Amitabh Chaturvedi, Adv. MS. Rakhi Ray, Adv.For UOI Mr. Tushar Mehta, ASG, Mr. S.Gurukrishna Kumar, Sr. Adv. Mr. D.L.Chidananda, Adv. MS. Sadhna Sandhu, Adv. MR. Rajat Nair, Adv. Ms. Anil Katiyar, Adv.I.A 135-137 Mr. Paras Kuhad, Sr. Adv. Mr. Omkar Geedh, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Agrawal,Adv. Mr. Jitin Chaturvedi, adv. MS. Swati Vijay Vargiya, Adv. Mr. Ramesh Babu M. R.,Adv. Ms. Swati Setia, Adv.. Mr. Sunil Fernandes,Adv. Ms. Astha Sharma, Adv. Mr. Puneeth K.G., Adv.I.A 177-179 Mr.Sameer Vashisth, Adv. Dr.(Mrs.) Vipin Gupta,Adv. 3 UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R By our Order dated 06.05.2016 passed in I.As. No. 180-182we had directed release of Subrata Roy Sahara and Ashok RoyChoudhary from Tihar jail for a period of four weeks to be heldin protective custody by a team of police officials deputed by theCommissioner of Police. That order has been complied. Both SubrataRoy Sahara and Ashok Roy Choudhary are currently in Lucknow inconnection with the death ceremonies of late Smt. Chhabi Roy,mother of Shri Subrata Roy Sahara. When the matter came up today, M/s. Subrata Roy Sahara and
Ashok Roy Choudhary strenuously argued that given an opportunity,the aforementioned two contemnors would deposit a minimum amount ofRs. 200/- crores (Rupees Two hundred Crores only) with SEBI by the11th July, 2016 to prove their bonafides. Mr. Arvind Datar, learned senior counsel appearing for SEBIsubmits that if the applicants file individual undertakings to theeffect that they shall deposit a sum of Rs. 200/- crores by the 11 thJuly, 2016, the arrangement made by us in terms of our Order dated6th May, 2016 could be extended till the 11th July, 2016. It issubmitted that from the list of properties filed today andsituate within and outside the country, it appears that the Saharasare possessed of sufficiently large assets to enable them to raisefor deposit with SEBI the requisite amount in terms of the earlierdirections of this Court. Their omission to do so, however,suggests that they have no intentions of depositing the amountunless forced to do so. Be that as it may, so long as the Saharas 4are ready to prove their bonafides by deposit of at least Rs. 200/-crores which is in comparison to the total amount liable to bedeposited just about a fraction. They could be permitted to do soby extending the existing arrangement. Mr. Shekhar Naphade, learned Amicus submits that thereluctance of Saharas to sell Ambey Valley properties which arevaluable and sufficient by themselves to fetch the requisite fundsraises serious doubts about their bonafides. Having given our anxious consideration to the submissions madeat the Bar, we are inclined to give one more chance to theapplicants namely Subrata Roy Sahara and Ashok Roy Choudhary toprove their bonafides depositing Rs. 200/- crores by the 11 th July,2016. We accordingly direct that the arrangement made in terms ofour Order dated 6th May, 2016 shall continue till 11th July, 2016subject to the following conditions:1) Subroto Roy Sahara and Ashok Roy Choudhary file individualundertakings in this Court within one week from today to the effectthat they shall deposit with SEBI a sum of Rs. 200/- crores by 11 th
July, 2016. In case they fail to do so, the police escort teamshall take them back to Tihar jail for being lodged there.2) The process of sale of properties, title deeds whereof standdeposited with SEBI shall continue unaffected and shall have noco-relation with the obligation of the two applicants mentionedabove to deposit Rs. 200/- crores by 11th July, 2016. The applicants shall be free of visit under the care andprotection of the escort team any place within the country providedthey help the Commissioner of Police, Delhi informed about their 5movements in advance. List of properties filed by Mr. Kapil Sibal is taken onrecord and shall be kept in a sealed cover by the Registry. Post on 11th July, 2016 at 2 P.M.I.As. No. 135-137 of 2015: Arguments heard. Judgment reserved.(Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
1 OUT-TODAY ITEM NO. 301 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.As. No. 180-182 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412 & 413 /2012 in C.A. No. 9813 and 9833/2011 and Contempt Petition © No. 260 of 2013 in Civil Appeal No. 8643 of 2012 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (With office report) Date : 06/05/2016 These I.As were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P.Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, adv. Mr. Purushottam Kumar Jha, Adv. Ms. Niharika, Adv. Mr. Aman Shukla, Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. For Respondent(s)/ Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Applicants Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Jain, Adv. Mr. Ayush Chaudhary, Adv. Ms. Preeti Singh, Adv. Mr. Abhinav Mani Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Nijam Pasha, Adv. Mr. Salim Inamdar, Adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv. Mr. Kumar Ayush, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Mr. R.S.YAdav, Adv. Mr. Amit Srivastava, Adv.
2 UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R These applications have been filed by Mr. Subrata Roy Sahara and Mr. Ashok Roy Choudhary presently lodged in the Tihar jail seeking provisional/temporary release of the applicants from custody for a period of three weeks on such terms and conditions as may be stipulated by this Court to enable them to perform the funeral and other rites of late Smt. Chhabi Roy, mother of Mr. Subrata Roy Sahara. Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel appearing for the applicants, submits that Smt. Chhabi Roy, mother of the applicant-Subrata Roy Sahara aged about 95 years old and ailing for some time, has passed away today at about 1.30 a.m. He submits that the applicants are required to perform the last rites of the deceased and other ceremonies connected therewith. He submits that the applicants could be permitted to do so on such terms and conditions as this Court may deem fit and proper. Mr.Arvind Datar, learned senior counsel appearing for SEBI fairly concedes that in the light of the bereavement in the family, the applicants' prayer for temporary release from jail could be considered on suitable terms and conditions to be stipulated by this Court. In the circumstances, therefore, and having regard to the submissions made at the Bar, we direct that the applicants, Mr. Subrata Roy Sahara and Ashok Roy Choudhary, presently lodged in
3 Tihar jail in Delhi shall be released from the jail temporarily for a period of four weeks to enable them to visit Lucknow for performing the last rites of late Smt. Chabbi Roy and to visit Haridwar and Ganga Sagar for such rites and ceremonies. The release of the applicants from Tihar jail shall however be subject to the following conditions: 1) The applicants shall be under protective custody and shall be escorted during their period outside the jail by a team of police officials to be deputed by the Commissioner of Police, Delhi, headed by an officer not less below the rank of Sub-Inspector of Police. 2) The police officials escorting the applicants during the period they are outside the jail shall be in plain clothes. The applicants shall not be hand-cuffed at any point of time. 3) The police officials escorting the applicants shall report their presence to the jurisdictional police station concerned where the applicants are taken in which event the jurisdictional police station concerned shall at all times provide all such help and support to the escort team as may be necessary. 4) Upon expiry of the period of four weeks from today, the escort team shall lodge the applicants back into Tihar jail. The applicants shall offer no resistance to that course and shall obey the escort team without demur. 5) The cost including travel, salary and other emoluments of the team deputed to escort the applicants shall be borne by the applicants-Saharas.
4 6) The Commissioner of Police, Delhi, shall be free to raise a suitable bill to SEBI to be paid out of SEBI Sahara Refund Account. Mr. Sibal assures the Court that the applicants shall at no point of time make any attempt to either escape from the protective custody of the escort team or otherwise leave the country especially when their passports are already deposited with competent authority. The Registry shall forthwith convey this order to the Commissioner of Police, Delhi, as also to the Superintendent of Tihar Jail for compliance. (Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
¸,1OUT-TODAYITEM NO. 301 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSI.As. No. 180-182 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412 & 413 /2012 in C.A. No.9813 and 9833/2011 and Contempt Petition © No. 260 of 2013 in CivilAppeal No. 8643 of 2012S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(With office report)Date : 06/05/2016 These I.As were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRIFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P.Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, adv. Mr. Purushottam Kumar Jha, Adv. Ms. Niharika, Adv. Mr. Aman Shukla, Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. For Respondent(s)/ Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv.Applicants Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, Sr. Adv.Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv.Mr. Nikhil Jain, Adv.Mr. Ayush Chaudhary, Adv.Ms. Preeti Singh, Adv.Mr. Abhinav Mani Tripathi, Adv.Mr. Nijam Pasha, Adv.Mr. Salim Inamdar, Adv.Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv.Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv.Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv.Mr. Kumar Ayush, Adv.Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv.Mr. R.S.YAdav, Adv.Mr. Amit Srivastava, Adv.2 UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R These applications have been filed by Mr. Subrata RoySahara and Mr. Ashok Roy Choudhary presently lodged in the Tiharjail seeking provisional/temporary release of the applicants fromcustody for a period of three weeks on such terms and conditions asmay be stipulated by this Court to enable them to perform thefuneral and other rites of late Smt. Chhabi Roy, mother of Mr.Subrata Roy Sahara. Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel appearing for theapplicants, submits that Smt. Chhabi Roy, mother of theapplicant-Subrata Roy Sahara aged about 95 years old and ailingfor some time, has passed away today at about 1.30 a.m. Hesubmits that the applicants are required to perform the last ritesof the deceased and other ceremonies connected therewith. Hesubmits that the applicants could be permitted to do so on suchterms and conditions as this Court may deem fit and proper. Mr.Arvind Datar, learned senior counsel appearing for SEBIfairly concedes that in the light of the bereavement in the family,the applicants' prayer for temporary release from jail could beconsidered on suitable terms and conditions to be stipulated bythis Court. In the circumstances, therefore, and having regard to thesubmissions made at the Bar, we direct that the applicants, Mr.Subrata Roy Sahara and Ashok Roy Choudhary, presently lodged in
3Tihar jail in Delhi shall be released from the jail temporarilyfor a period of four weeks to enable them to visit Lucknow forperforming the last rites of late Smt. Chabbi Roy and to visitHaridwar and Ganga Sagar for such rites and ceremonies. Therelease of the applicants from Tihar jail shall however be subjectto the following conditions:1) The applicants shall be under protective custody and shall beescorted during their period outside the jail by a team of policeofficials to be deputed by the Commissioner of Police, Delhi,headed by an officer not less below the rank of Sub-Inspector ofPolice.2) The police officials escorting the applicants during theperiod they are outside the jail shall be in plain clothes. Theapplicants shall not be hand-cuffed at any point of time.3) The police officials escorting the applicants shall reporttheir presence to the jurisdictional police station concerned wherethe applicants are taken in which event the jurisdictional policestation concerned shall at all times provide all such help andsupport to the escort team as may be necessary.4) Upon expiry of the period of four weeks from today, the escortteam shall lodge the applicants back into Tihar jail. Theapplicants shall offer no resistance to that course and shall obeythe escort team without demur.5) The cost including travel, salary and other emoluments of theteam deputed to escort the applicants shall be borne by theapplicants-Saharas.46) The Commissioner of Police, Delhi, shall be free to raise asuitable bill to SEBI to be paid out of SEBI Sahara RefundAccount. Mr. Sibal assures the Court that the applicants shall atno point of time make any attempt to either escape from theprotective custody of the escort team or otherwise leave thecountry especially when their passports are already deposited withcompetent authority. The Registry shall forthwith convey this order to theCommissioner of Police, Delhi, as also to the Superintendent ofTihar Jail for compliance.(Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
1 ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A.NOS. 77-79, 89-91, 104-106, 83-85, 144-146, 153-155, 158-160, 147, 161-163, 164-165, 166, 167, 168-170, 171-173, 174-176, 177-179/2016, 132-134, 135-137/2015, 138-140/2016, 141-143/2016 & 131/2015 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412 & 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9813 & 9833/2011 AND C.P. (C)NO.260/2013 IN C.A.NO.8643/2012 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (for appropriate orders and impleadment and directions and placing on record additional facts and documents and exemption from filing O.T. and office report) Date : 27/04/2016 These applications were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Shekhar Napahade, Sr.Adv. (A.C.) Ms. Shubhangi Tuli, Adv. Mr. Vikram Sobti, Adv. Mr. Arvind P.Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, adv. MS. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Purushottam Kumar Jha, Adv. Mr. Anuj Sarma, Adv. MS. Niharika, Adv. Mr. Aman Shukla, Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. For Respondent(s) Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Jain, Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary, adv. MS. Preeti Singh, Adv. Mr. Abhinav Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Nijam Pasha, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv.
2 Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv. Mr. Kumar Ayush, adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Vijay KumaR, Adv. Mr. R.S.Yadav, Adv. Mr. Dhirendra Singh, Adv. Mr. Sujit Keshri, Adv. Mr. Arun K. Sinha,Adv. Mr. Paras Kuhas, Sr. Adv. Mr. Omkar Geedh, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Agrawal,Adv. Mr. Jitin Chaturvedi, adv. MS. Swati Vijay Vargiya, Adv. Mr.Rohan Thawani, Adv. MS. Vandana Sehgal, Adv. Mr.Anand Daga, Adv. Mr. Bhushan Mohata, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. Mr. Ramesh Babu M. R.,Adv. MS. Swati Setia, Adv. Mr. D.L.Chidananda, Adv. Ms. Sadhna Sandhu, adv. Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar,Adv . Mr. Sunil Fernandes,Adv. Ms. Astha Sharma, Adv. Mr. Puneeth K.G., Adv. Mr. Yash Pal Dhingra,Adv. Mr. Satyajit A.Desai, adv. Ms. Anagha S. Desai,Adv. Mr. Mithilesh Kumar, Adv. Mr. Sanjib Sen, Sr. Adv. Mr. Amitabh Chaturvedi, adv. Mr. Sumit Shukla, Adv. Mr. S.S.Ray, Adv. Mr. Sanjeev Sachdeva, Adv. Ms. Rakhi Ray,Adv. Mr. Biswajit Bhattacharya, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pawan Upadhayay, adv.
3 Ms. Sharmila Upadhyay,Adv. Ms. Vandana Sehgal,Adv. Mr. Manish Vashisht, Adv. Mr. Samir Vashisht, Adv. Dr.(Mrs.) Vipin Gupta,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R I.As. No. 164-165 of 2016 : Learned counsel for the applicants submits that he has instructions to withdraw these applications as the claims made by the applicants stand fully satisfied. I.As. No. 164-165 of 2016 are accordingly dismissed as withdrawn. I.A No. 166 of 2016 : Heard. By our Order dated 21.11.2013, we had directed that Sahara Group of Companies shall not part with any moveable and immoveable properties until further orders from this Court. That order has remained in force ever since. In the present application, the applicant seeks a clarification to the effect that the order afore-mentioned does not prevent the applicants from executing/enforcing the judgment dated 11.08.2015 passed by NCDRC against Sahara India Commercial Corporation Ltd. in Consumer Complaint No. 47 of 2009. We see no reason to decline that prayer. We accordingly clarify that our Order dated 21.11.2013 passed in Consumer Complaint No. 47 of 2009 in Contempt Petition © No. 412 of 2012 in Civil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011 shall not prevent the
4 applicant from executing the judgment dated 11.08.2015 of the NCDRC passed against Sahara India Commercial Corporation Limited in Consumer Complaint No. 47 of 2009 in accordance with law. I.A No. 167 of 2016 : Heard. On the analogy of the Order passed in I.A. No. 166 of 2016 we clarify that our Order dated 21.11.2013 passed in Consumer Complaint No. CC/13/17 in Contempt Petition © No. 412 of 2012 in Civil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011 shall not prevent the applicants from executing the judgment dated 07.11.2015 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Maharashtra, Nagpur passed against Sahara India Commercial Corporation Limited in Consumer Complaint No. CC/13/17 in accordance with law. I.A. No. 147 of 2016 : In this application seeking intervention by the applicants, the applicant's precise grievance appears to be that Complaint Case No. CC/13/15 filed by him before the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Maharashtra, Circuit Bench, Nagpur is not being proceeded with on account of our Order dated 21.11.2013 in Contempt Petition No. 412 of 2012 in Civil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011. It is submitted by learned counsel for the intervenor that intervenor-applicant shall be satisfied in case it is clarified that the order passed by this Court on 21.11.2013, whereby this Court restrained the Sahara Group of Companies from alienating any property moveable or otherwise, does not prevent the
5 concerned Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission from proceeding with contempt case filed by the applicants and passing appropriate orders on the same. We see no reason to decline that prayer. We make it clear that our dated 21.11.2013 shall not prevent the concerned Disputes Redressal Commission from proceeding with and passing orders in accordance with law in pending Complaint Case No. CC/13/15 filed by the applicant. I.A. No. 147 of 2016 is accordingly disposed of with the said direction. I.As. No. 153-155 of 2016 : Mr. Biswajit Bhattacharya, learned senior counsel for the applicants submits that he does not propose to press these applications for the present. The applications are dismissed as not pressed. I.A. No. 131 of 2016 : Heard. Learned counsel for the parties agree that the genuineness of the agreement to sell and purchase allegedly entered into between Sahara India Commercial Corporation Ltd. on the one hand and the applicant on the other and the payments allegedly made towards sale consideration of the property agreed to be sold and purchased by the parties could be left to be verified by Mr. Justice B.N.Agrawal before whom the parties agree to present their respective versions supported by documents. We request Justice Agrawal to look into the matter and verify whether alleged transaction has been entered into by the parties and whether any payment pursuant to the said transactions have been paid and received by the purchaser and the
6 seller, if so, whether said payments are made before the issue of the order of restraint dated 21.11.2013 passed by us. We hope and trust that Justice Agrawal shall submit a status report on the subject expeditiously but not later than three months from the date a copy of this order is received by him. Post after the needful is done. I.As. No. 174-176 of 2016 : By our order dated 29.03.2016, we had issued several directions including a direction to SEBI to devise a suitable mechanism for sale of properties, the title deeds whereof have already been deposited with it by Saharas. The mechanism for such sale was to be finalised in consultation with and under the supervision of Justice B.N.Agrawal, former Judge of this Court. Mr. Arvind P.Datar, learned senior counsel for SEBI has pursuant to the said directions filed 15 th Status Report of SEBI in which it is inter alia pointed out that SEBI has in consultation with Justice Agrawal engaged the services of HDFC Reality (a subsidiary of Housing Development Finance Corporation Ltd.) and SEBI Capital Markets Limited (SBICAP), a subsidiary of State Bank of India for auctioning of the properties. The report sets out the terms and conditions on which the afore-mentioned two agencies have agreed to undertake the process of sale and transfer of properties in question. Mr. Arvind P.Datar submits that the two agencies engaged by SEBI have been given four months' time to complete the process of effecting the sales. He submits that the first phase of the process of sale is to commence in the immediate future and that
7 given two weeks' time, he should be able to file a further status report indicating the progress made in that direction. He further states that the title deeds deposited by Saharas with SEBI need to be verified, the defects, if any, rectified with the help of the concerned Sahara companies. Be that as it may, we expect the agencies engaged by SEBI to take immediate steps for sale of the properties in question after due and proper verification and after completing all other safeguards necessary for ensuring that the properties are sold for the optimum price they can fetch. Mr. Datar points out that Saharas have not so far submitted a complete list of all the properties owned by them. He urged that on record are found only two lists, one comprising properties at Versova and Vasai and the other enumerating 71 different items of properties which include Vasai for a second time. The first list estimates the market value of Versova and Vasai at Rs. 20,443.72 crores. The second list comprising 71 items includes Vasai and estimates the value of the property at Rs. 20,172.50 crores. It is submitted by Mr. Datar that a large number of properties are owned by Sahara Group of the Companies over and above, the two lists mentioned above, details whereof has not been shared by the Saharas so far with this Court. He urged that Saharas could be directed to give a complete list of all the properties owned by them with probable value of each such property. Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, learned senior counsel appearing for the contemnors on the other hand submits that the two lists referred to by Mr. Arvind Datar are not exhaustive. He submitted that he will take instructions and produce a complete list of all the properties
8 owned by Saharas over and above those mentioned in the list that are already filed before this Court. Having said that Dr. Dhavan submitted that given the fact that the contemnors have spent more than two years in jail and the fact that SEBI has now been authorised to sell the properties mentioned in the two lists except Ambey Valley, this Court could consider granting parole to the contemnors or in the alternative shifting him out of the jail to be held under house arrest so that the contemnors could also assist in the process of sale of the properties with or without the intervention of SEBI to raise the money required to be deposited. He further submitted that if SEBI could furnish a copy of the title deeds consisting of Versova properties of Saharas, the latter may make an attempt to find purchasers for the said property with a view to raising funds for deposit with SEBI. Mr. Datar had no objection to a copy of title deed in question being made available to Saharas. In the circumstances, therefore, we adjourn these matters till 11.05.2016. Mr. Datar may file an interim report as to the progress made in the direction of sale of the properties by the agencies. In the meantime Saharas shall file a list of the remaining properties owned by them. Dr. Dhawan at this stage submits that a certain amount of money representing returns on the investment in gold and commodities (Spot Exchange) is lying to the credit of Sahara Q Shop Unique Products Range Ltd. with the National Spot Exchange. It is submitted that Sahara Q Shop Unique Products Range Limited appear to have approached the spot exchange for payment which request was
9 opposed by SEBI in view of the restraint order issued by this Court. He submits that this Court could permit SEBI to collect the amount payable to Saharas for adjustment against the outstanding dues. Mr. Datar seeks time to look into the matter and do the needful. We make it clear that any amount or commodity including gold which is lying with the spot exchange in the account of any one of the Sahara companies shall be made over to the SEBI for deposit in the SEBI Sahara Account. Earlier orders passed by us shall not be taken as an impediment for any such disbursement/payment to SEBI in terms of this order. I.A. No. 135-137 of 2015 : M/s.Devendra Rajnikant Ladhani, Anil Ramchandra Gupta, Mukesh Shivdas Sonar, Directors of the Company who were directed to remain present in person to show cause why contempt proceedings be not be initiated against them are present in the Court. Mr. Paras Kuhad, learned senior counsel has already submitted his reply in this regard. List the matter again on 11.05.2016. The Directors shall remain present in person on that date. (Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
nv1ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSI.A.NOS. 77-79, 89-91, 104-106, 83-85, 144-146, 153-155, 158-160,147, 161-163, 164-165, 166, 167, 168-170, 171-173, 174-176,177-179/2016, 132-134, 135-137/2015, 138-140/2016, 141-143/2016 &131/2015 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412 & 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9813 &9833/2011 AND C.P. (C)NO.260/2013 IN C.A.NO.8643/2012 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(for appropriate orders and impleadment and directions and placing on record additional facts and documents and exemption from filing O.T. and office report)Date : 27/04/2016 These applications were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRIFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Shekhar Napahade, Sr.Adv. (A.C.) Ms. Shubhangi Tuli, Adv. Mr. Vikram Sobti, Adv. Mr. Arvind P.Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, adv. MS. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Purushottam Kumar Jha, Adv. Mr. Anuj Sarma, Adv. MS. Niharika, Adv. Mr. Aman Shukla, Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. For Respondent(s) Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Jain, Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary, adv. MS. Preeti Singh, Adv. Mr. Abhinav Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Nijam Pasha, Adv.2 Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv. Mr. Kumar Ayush, adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Vijay KumaR, Adv. Mr. R.S.Yadav, Adv. Mr. Dhirendra Singh, Adv. Mr. Sujit Keshri, Adv. Mr. Arun K. Sinha,Adv. Mr. Paras Kuhas, Sr. Adv. Mr. Omkar Geedh, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Agrawal,Adv. Mr. Jitin Chaturvedi, adv. MS. Swati Vijay Vargiya, Adv. Mr.Rohan Thawani, Adv. MS. Vandana Sehgal, Adv. Mr.Anand Daga, Adv. Mr. Bhushan Mohata, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. Mr. Ramesh Babu M. R.,Adv. MS. Swati Setia, Adv. Mr. D.L.Chidananda, Adv. Ms. Sadhna Sandhu, adv.
Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar,Adv. Mr. Sunil Fernandes,Adv. Ms. Astha Sharma, Adv. Mr. Puneeth K.G., Adv. Mr. Yash Pal Dhingra,Adv. Mr. Satyajit A.Desai, adv. Ms. Anagha S. Desai,Adv. Mr. Mithilesh Kumar, Adv. Mr. Sanjib Sen, Sr. Adv. Mr. Amitabh Chaturvedi, adv. Mr. Sumit Shukla, Adv. Mr. S.S.Ray, Adv. Mr. Sanjeev Sachdeva, Adv. Ms. Rakhi Ray,Adv. Mr. Biswajit Bhattacharya, Sr. Adv.3 Mr. Pawan Upadhayay, adv. Ms. Sharmila Upadhyay,Adv. Ms. Vandana Sehgal,Adv. Mr. Manish Vashisht, Adv. Mr. Samir Vashisht, Adv. Dr.(Mrs.) Vipin Gupta,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R I.As. No. 164-165 of 2016 :Learned counsel for the applicants submits that he hasinstructions to withdraw these applications as the claims made bythe applicants stand fully satisfied. I.As. No. 164-165 of 2016are accordingly dismissed as withdrawn.I.A No. 166 of 2016 :Heard.By our Order dated 21.11.2013, we had directed thatSahara Group of Companies shall not part with any moveable andimmoveable properties until further orders from this Court. Thatorder has remained in force ever since. In the present application,the applicant seeks a clarification to the effect that the orderafore-mentioned does not prevent the applicants fromexecuting/enforcing the judgment dated 11.08.2015 passed by NCDRCagainst Sahara India Commercial Corporation Ltd. in ConsumerComplaint No. 47 of 2009. We see no reason to decline that prayer.We accordingly clarify that our Order dated 21.11.2013 passed inConsumer Complaint No. 47 of 2009 in Contempt Petition © No. 412 of2012 in Civil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011 shall not prevent the4applicant from executing the judgment dated 11.08.2015 of the NCDRCpassed against Sahara India Commercial Corporation Limited inConsumer Complaint No. 47 of 2009 in accordance with law.I.A No. 167 of 2016 :Heard.On the analogy of the Order passed in I.A. No. 166 of2016 we clarify that our Order dated 21.11.2013 passed in ConsumerComplaint No. CC/13/17 in Contempt Petition © No. 412 of 2012 inCivil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011 shall not prevent the applicants fromexecuting the judgment dated 07.11.2015 of the State ConsumerDisputes Redressal Commission, Maharashtra, Nagpur passed againstSahara India Commercial Corporation Limited in Consumer ComplaintNo. CC/13/17 in accordance with law.I.A. No. 147 of 2016 :In this application seeking intervention by theapplicants, the applicant's precise grievance appears to be thatComplaint Case No. CC/13/15 filed by him before the State ConsumerDisputes Redressal Commission, Maharashtra, Circuit Bench, Nagpuris not being proceeded with on account of our Order dated21.11.2013 in Contempt Petition No. 412 of 2012 in Civil Appeal No.
9813 of 2011. It is submitted by learned counsel for theintervenor that intervenor-applicant shall be satisfied in case itis clarified that the order passed by this Court on 21.11.2013,whereby this Court restrained the Sahara Group of Companies fromalienating any property moveable or otherwise, does not prevent the5concerned Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission from proceedingwith contempt case filed by the applicants and passing appropriateorders on the same. We see no reason to decline that prayer. Wemake it clear that our dated 21.11.2013 shall not prevent theconcerned Disputes Redressal Commission from proceeding with andpassing orders in accordance with law in pending Complaint Case No.CC/13/15 filed by the applicant. I.A. No. 147 of 2016 is accordingly disposed of with the saiddirection.I.As. No. 153-155 of 2016 :Mr. Biswajit Bhattacharya, learned senior counsel for theapplicants submits that he does not propose to press theseapplications for the present. The applications are dismissed asnot pressed.I.A. No. 131 of 2016 :Heard. Learned counsel for the parties agree that the genuineness ofthe agreement to sell and purchase allegedly entered into betweenSahara India Commercial Corporation Ltd. on the one hand and theapplicant on the other and the payments allegedly made towards saleconsideration of the property agreed to be sold and purchased bythe parties could be left to be verified by Mr. Justice B.N.Agrawalbefore whom the parties agree to present their respective versionssupported by documents. We request Justice Agrawal to look intothe matter and verify whether alleged transaction has been enteredinto by the parties and whether any payment pursuant to the saidtransactions have been paid and received by the purchaser and the6seller, if so, whether said payments are made before the issue ofthe order of restraint dated 21.11.2013 passed by us. We hope andtrust that Justice Agrawal shall submit a status report on thesubject expeditiously but not later than three months from the datea copy of this order is received by him. Post after the needful is done.I.As. No. 174-176 of 2016 :By our order dated 29.03.2016, we had issued severaldirections including a direction to SEBI to devise a suitablemechanism for sale of properties, the title deeds whereof havealready been deposited with it by Saharas. The mechanism for suchsale was to be finalised in consultation with and under thesupervision of Justice B.N.Agrawal, former Judge of this Court.Mr. Arvind P.Datar, learned senior counsel for SEBI has pursuant tothe said directions filed 15 th Status Report of SEBI in which it isinter alia pointed out that SEBI has in consultation with JusticeAgrawal engaged the services of HDFC Reality (a subsidiary ofHousing Development Finance Corporation Ltd.) and SEBI CapitalMarkets Limited (SBICAP), a subsidiary of State Bank of India forauctioning of the properties. The report sets out the terms andconditions on which the afore-mentioned two agencies have agreed toundertake the process of sale and transfer of properties inquestion. Mr. Arvind P.Datar submits that the two agencies engagedby SEBI have been given four months' time to complete the processof effecting the sales. He submits that the first phase of theprocess of sale is to commence in the immediate future and that7given two weeks' time, he should be able to file a further statusreport indicating the progress made in that direction. He furtherstates that the title deeds deposited by Saharas with SEBI need tobe verified, the defects, if any, rectified with the help of the
concerned Sahara companies. Be that as it may, we expect theagencies engaged by SEBI to take immediate steps for sale of theproperties in question after due and proper verification and aftercompleting all other safeguards necessary for ensuring that theproperties are sold for the optimum price they can fetch.Mr. Datar points out that Saharas have not so far submitted acomplete list of all the properties owned by them. He urged thaton record are found only two lists, one comprising properties atVersova and Vasai and the other enumerating 71 different items ofproperties which include Vasai for a second time. The first listestimates the market value of Versova and Vasai at Rs. 20,443.72crores. The second list comprising 71 items includes Vasai andestimates the value of the property at Rs. 20,172.50 crores. It issubmitted by Mr. Datar that a large number of properties are ownedby Sahara Group of the Companies over and above, the two listsmentioned above, details whereof has not been shared by the Saharasso far with this Court. He urged that Saharas could be directed togive a complete list of all the properties owned by them withprobable value of each such property. Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, learned senior counsel appearing for thecontemnors on the other hand submits that the two lists referred toby Mr. Arvind Datar are not exhaustive. He submitted that he willtake instructions and produce a complete list of all the properties8owned by Saharas over and above those mentioned in the list thatare already filed before this Court.Having said that Dr. Dhavan submitted that given the fact thatthe contemnors have spent more than two years in jail and the factthat SEBI has now been authorised to sell the properties mentionedin the two lists except Ambey Valley, this Court could considergranting parole to the contemnors or in the alternative shiftinghim out of the jail to be held under house arrest so that thecontemnors could also assist in the process of sale of theproperties with or without the intervention of SEBI to raise themoney required to be deposited. He further submitted that if SEBIcould furnish a copy of the title deeds consisting of Versovaproperties of Saharas, the latter may make an attempt to findpurchasers for the said property with a view to raising funds fordeposit with SEBI. Mr. Datar had no objection to a copy of titledeed in question being made available to Saharas. In the circumstances, therefore, we adjourn these matterstill 11.05.2016. Mr. Datar may file an interim report as to theprogress made in the direction of sale of the properties by theagencies. In the meantime Saharas shall file a list of theremaining properties owned by them. Dr. Dhawan at this stage submits that a certain amount ofmoney representing returns on the investment in gold andcommodities (Spot Exchange) is lying to the credit of Sahara Q ShopUnique Products Range Ltd. with the National Spot Exchange. It issubmitted that Sahara Q Shop Unique Products Range Limited appearto have approached the spot exchange for payment which request was9opposed by SEBI in view of the restraint order issued by thisCourt. He submits that this Court could permit SEBI to collect theamount payable to Saharas for adjustment against the outstandingdues. Mr. Datar seeks time to look into the matter and do theneedful. We make it clear that any amount or commodity includinggold which is lying with the spot exchange in the account of anyone of the Sahara companies shall be made over to the SEBI fordeposit in the SEBI Sahara Account. Earlier orders passed by usshall not be taken as an impediment for any suchdisbursement/payment to SEBI in terms of this order.I.A. No. 135-137 of 2015 : M/s.Devendra Rajnikant Ladhani, Anil Ramchandra Gupta, MukeshShivdas Sonar, Directors of the Company who were directed to remainpresent in person to show cause why contempt proceedings be not beinitiated against them are present in the Court. Mr. Paras Kuhad,
learned senior counsel has already submitted his reply in thisregard.List the matter again on 11.05.2016.The Directors shall remain present in person on that date.(Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
<7 1 OUT-TODAY ITEM NO. 301 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.As. No. 180-182 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412 & 413 /2012 in C.A. No. 9813 and 9833/2011 and Contempt Petition ) No. 260 of 2013 in Civil Appeal No. 8643 of 2012 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (With office report) Date : 06/05/2016 These I.As were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P.Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, adv. Mr. Purushottam Kumar Jha, Adv. Ms. Niharika, Adv. Mr. Aman Shukla, Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. For Respondent(s)/ Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Applicants Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Jain, Adv. Mr. Ayush Chaudhary, Adv. Ms. Preeti Singh, Adv. Mr. Abhinav Mani Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Nijam Pasha, Adv. Mr. Salim Inamdar, Adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv.Signature Not Verified Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv.Digitally signed bySHASHI SAREENDate: 2016.05.06 Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv.16:37:51 ISTReason: Mr. Kumar Ayush, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Mr. R.S.YAdav, Adv. Mr. Amit Srivastava, Adv. 2 UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R These applications have been filed by Mr. Subrata Roy
Sahara and Mr. Ashok Roy Choudhary presently lodged in the Tiharjail seeking provisional/temporary release of the applicants fromcustody for a period of three weeks on such terms and conditions asmay be stipulated by this Court to enable them to perform thefuneral and other rites of late Smt. Chhabi Roy, mother of Mr.Subrata Roy Sahara. Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel appearing for theapplicants, submits that Smt. Chhabi Roy, mother of theapplicant-Subrata Roy Sahara aged about 95 years old and ailingfor some time, has passed away today at about 1.30 a.m. Hesubmits that the applicants are required to perform the last ritesof the deceased and other ceremonies connected therewith. Hesubmits that the applicants could be permitted to do so on suchterms and conditions as this Court may deem fit and proper. Mr.Arvind Datar, learned senior counsel appearing for SEBIfairly concedes that in the light of the bereavement in the family,the applicants' prayer for temporary release from jail could beconsidered on suitable terms and conditions to be stipulated bythis Court. In the circumstances, therefore, and having regard to thesubmissions made at the Bar, we direct that the applicants, Mr.Subrata Roy Sahara and Ashok Roy Choudhary, presently lodged in 3Tihar jail in Delhi shall be released from the jail temporarilyfor a period of four weeks to enable them to visit Lucknow forperforming the last rites of late Smt. Chabbi Roy and to visitHaridwar and Ganga Sagar for such rites and ceremonies. Therelease of the applicants from Tihar jail shall however be subjectto the following conditions:1) The applicants shall be under protective custody and shall beescorted during their period outside the jail by a team of policeofficials to be deputed by the Commissioner of Police, Delhi,
headed by an officer not less below the rank of Sub-Inspector ofPolice.2) The police officials escorting the applicants during theperiod they are outside the jail shall be in plain clothes. Theapplicants shall not be hand-cuffed at any point of time.3) The police officials escorting the applicants shall reporttheir presence to the jurisdictional police station concerned wherethe applicants are taken in which event the jurisdictional policestation concerned shall at all times provide all such help andsupport to the escort team as may be necessary.4) Upon expiry of the period of four weeks from today, the escortteam shall lodge the applicants back into Tihar jail. Theapplicants shall offer no resistance to that course and shall obeythe escort team without demur.5) The cost including travel, salary and other emoluments of theteam deputed to escort the applicants shall be borne by theapplicants-Saharas. 46) The Commissioner of Police, Delhi, shall be free to raise asuitable bill to SEBI to be paid out of SEBI Sahara RefundAccount. Mr. Sibal assures the Court that the applicants shall atno point of time make any attempt to either escape from theprotective custody of the escort team or otherwise leave thecountry especially when their passports are already deposited withcompetent authority. The Registry shall forthwith convey this order to theCommissioner of Police, Delhi, as also to the Superintendent ofTihar Jail for compliance.(Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
lv1ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSI.A.NOS. 77-79, 89-91, 104-106, 83-85, 144-146, 153-155, 158-160,147, 161-163, 164-165, 166, 167, 168-170, 171-173, 174-176,177-179/2016, 132-134, 135-137/2015, 138-140/2016, 141-143/2016 &131/2015 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412 & 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9813 &9833/2011 AND C.P. (C)NO.260/2013 IN C.A.NO.8643/2012 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(for appropriate orders and impleadment and directions and placing on record additional facts and documents and exemption from filing O.T. and office report)Date : 27/04/2016 These applications were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRIFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Shekhar Napahade, Sr.Adv. (A.C.) Ms. Shubhangi Tuli, Adv. Mr. Vikram Sobti, Adv. Mr. Arvind P.Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, adv. MS. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Purushottam Kumar Jha, Adv. Mr. Anuj Sarma, Adv. MS. Niharika, Adv. Mr. Aman Shukla, Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. For Respondent(s) Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Jain, Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary, adv. MS. Preeti Singh, Adv. Mr. Abhinav Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Nijam Pasha, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv.2 Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv. Mr. Kumar Ayush, adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Vijay KumaR, Adv. Mr. R.S.Yadav, Adv. Mr. Dhirendra Singh, Adv. Mr. Sujit Keshri, Adv. Mr. Arun K. Sinha,Adv. Mr. Paras Kuhas, Sr. Adv. Mr. Omkar Geedh, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Agrawal,Adv. Mr. Jitin Chaturvedi, adv. MS. Swati Vijay Vargiya, Adv. Mr.Rohan Thawani, Adv. MS. Vandana Sehgal, Adv. Mr.Anand Daga, Adv. Mr. Bhushan Mohata, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. Mr. Ramesh Babu M. R.,Adv. MS. Swati Setia, Adv. Mr. D.L.Chidananda, Adv. Ms. Sadhna Sandhu, adv. Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv.
Mrs. Anil Katiyar,Adv. Mr. Sunil Fernandes,Adv. Ms. Astha Sharma, Adv. Mr. Puneeth K.G., Adv. Mr. Yash Pal Dhingra,Adv. Mr. Satyajit A.Desai, adv. Ms. Anagha S. Desai,Adv. Mr. Mithilesh Kumar, Adv. Mr. Sanjib Sen, Sr. Adv. Mr. Amitabh Chaturvedi, adv. Mr. Sumit Shukla, Adv. Mr. S.S.Ray, Adv. Mr. Sanjeev Sachdeva, Adv. Ms. Rakhi Ray,Adv. Mr. Biswajit Bhattacharya, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pawan Upadhayay, adv.3 Ms. Sharmila Upadhyay,Adv. Ms. Vandana Sehgal,Adv. Mr. Manish Vashisht, Adv. Mr. Samir Vashisht, Adv. Dr.(Mrs.) Vipin Gupta,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R I.As. No. 164-165 of 2016 :Learned counsel for the applicants submits that he hasinstructions to withdraw these applications as the claims made bythe applicants stand fully satisfied. I.As. No. 164-165 of 2016are accordingly dismissed as withdrawn.I.A No. 166 of 2016 :Heard.By our Order dated 21.11.2013, we had directed thatSahara Group of Companies shall not part with any moveable andimmoveable properties until further orders from this Court. Thatorder has remained in force ever since. In the present application,the applicant seeks a clarification to the effect that the orderafore-mentioned does not prevent the applicants fromexecuting/enforcing the judgment dated 11.08.2015 passed by NCDRCagainst Sahara India Commercial Corporation Ltd. in ConsumerComplaint No. 47 of 2009. We see no reason to decline that prayer.We accordingly clarify that our Order dated 21.11.2013 passed inConsumer Complaint No. 47 of 2009 in Contempt Petition © No. 412 of2012 in Civil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011 shall not prevent the4applicant from executing the judgment dated 11.08.2015 of the NCDRCpassed against Sahara India Commercial Corporation Limited inConsumer Complaint No. 47 of 2009 in accordance with law.I.A No. 167 of 2016 :Heard.On the analogy of the Order passed in I.A. No. 166 of2016 we clarify that our Order dated 21.11.2013 passed in ConsumerComplaint No. CC/13/17 in Contempt Petition © No. 412 of 2012 inCivil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011 shall not prevent the applicants fromexecuting the judgment dated 07.11.2015 of the State ConsumerDisputes Redressal Commission, Maharashtra, Nagpur passed againstSahara India Commercial Corporation Limited in Consumer ComplaintNo. CC/13/17 in accordance with law.I.A. No. 147 of 2016 :In this application seeking intervention by theapplicants, the applicant's precise grievance appears to be thatComplaint Case No. CC/13/15 filed by him before the State ConsumerDisputes Redressal Commission, Maharashtra, Circuit Bench, Nagpuris not being proceeded with on account of our Order dated21.11.2013 in Contempt Petition No. 412 of 2012 in Civil Appeal No.9813 of 2011. It is submitted by learned counsel for the
intervenor that intervenor-applicant shall be satisfied in case itis clarified that the order passed by this Court on 21.11.2013,whereby this Court restrained the Sahara Group of Companies fromalienating any property moveable or otherwise, does not prevent the5concerned Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission from proceedingwith contempt case filed by the applicants and passing appropriateorders on the same. We see no reason to decline that prayer. Wemake it clear that our dated 21.11.2013 shall not prevent theconcerned Disputes Redressal Commission from proceeding with andpassing orders in accordance with law in pending Complaint Case No.CC/13/15 filed by the applicant. I.A. No. 147 of 2016 is accordingly disposed of with the saiddirection.I.As. No. 153-155 of 2016 :Mr. Biswajit Bhattacharya, learned senior counsel for theapplicants submits that he does not propose to press theseapplications for the present. The applications are dismissed asnot pressed.I.A. No. 131 of 2016 :Heard. Learned counsel for the parties agree that the genuineness ofthe agreement to sell and purchase allegedly entered into betweenSahara India Commercial Corporation Ltd. on the one hand and theapplicant on the other and the payments allegedly made towards saleconsideration of the property agreed to be sold and purchased bythe parties could be left to be verified by Mr. Justice B.N.Agrawalbefore whom the parties agree to present their respective versionssupported by documents. We request Justice Agrawal to look intothe matter and verify whether alleged transaction has been enteredinto by the parties and whether any payment pursuant to the saidtransactions have been paid and received by the purchaser and the6seller, if so, whether said payments are made before the issue ofthe order of restraint dated 21.11.2013 passed by us. We hope andtrust that Justice Agrawal shall submit a status report on thesubject expeditiously but not later than three months from the datea copy of this order is received by him. Post after the needful is done.I.As. No. 174-176 of 2016 :By our order dated 29.03.2016, we had issued severaldirections including a direction to SEBI to devise a suitablemechanism for sale of properties, the title deeds whereof havealready been deposited with it by Saharas. The mechanism for suchsale was to be finalised in consultation with and under thesupervision of Justice B.N.Agrawal, former Judge of this Court.Mr. Arvind P.Datar, learned senior counsel for SEBI has pursuant tothe said directions filed 15 th Status Report of SEBI in which it isinter alia pointed out that SEBI has in consultation with JusticeAgrawal engaged the services of HDFC Reality (a subsidiary ofHousing Development Finance Corporation Ltd.) and SEBI CapitalMarkets Limited (SBICAP), a subsidiary of State Bank of India forauctioning of the properties. The report sets out the terms andconditions on which the afore-mentioned two agencies have agreed toundertake the process of sale and transfer of properties inquestion. Mr. Arvind P.Datar submits that the two agencies engagedby SEBI have been given four months' time to complete the processof effecting the sales. He submits that the first phase of theprocess of sale is to commence in the immediate future and that7given two weeks' time, he should be able to file a further statusreport indicating the progress made in that direction. He furtherstates that the title deeds deposited by Saharas with SEBI need tobe verified, the defects, if any, rectified with the help of theconcerned Sahara companies. Be that as it may, we expect the
agencies engaged by SEBI to take immediate steps for sale of theproperties in question after due and proper verification and aftercompleting all other safeguards necessary for ensuring that theproperties are sold for the optimum price they can fetch.Mr. Datar points out that Saharas have not so far submitted acomplete list of all the properties owned by them. He urged thaton record are found only two lists, one comprising properties atVersova and Vasai and the other enumerating 71 different items ofproperties which include Vasai for a second time. The first listestimates the market value of Versova and Vasai at Rs. 20,443.72crores. The second list comprising 71 items includes Vasai andestimates the value of the property at Rs. 20,172.50 crores. It issubmitted by Mr. Datar that a large number of properties are ownedby Sahara Group of the Companies over and above, the two listsmentioned above, details whereof has not been shared by the Saharasso far with this Court. He urged that Saharas could be directed togive a complete list of all the properties owned by them withprobable value of each such property. Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, learned senior counsel appearing for thecontemnors on the other hand submits that the two lists referred toby Mr. Arvind Datar are not exhaustive. He submitted that he willtake instructions and produce a complete list of all the properties8owned by Saharas over and above those mentioned in the list thatare already filed before this Court.Having said that Dr. Dhavan submitted that given the fact thatthe contemnors have spent more than two years in jail and the factthat SEBI has now been authorised to sell the properties mentionedin the two lists except Ambey Valley, this Court could considergranting parole to the contemnors or in the alternative shiftinghim out of the jail to be held under house arrest so that thecontemnors could also assist in the process of sale of theproperties with or without the intervention of SEBI to raise themoney required to be deposited. He further submitted that if SEBIcould furnish a copy of the title deeds consisting of Versovaproperties of Saharas, the latter may make an attempt to findpurchasers for the said property with a view to raising funds fordeposit with SEBI. Mr. Datar had no objection to a copy of titledeed in question being made available to Saharas. In the circumstances, therefore, we adjourn these matterstill 11.05.2016. Mr. Datar may file an interim report as to theprogress made in the direction of sale of the properties by theagencies. In the meantime Saharas shall file a list of theremaining properties owned by them. Dr. Dhawan at this stage submits that a certain amount ofmoney representing returns on the investment in gold andcommodities (Spot Exchange) is lying to the credit of Sahara Q ShopUnique Products Range Ltd. with the National Spot Exchange. It issubmitted that Sahara Q Shop Unique Products Range Limited appearto have approached the spot exchange for payment which request was9opposed by SEBI in view of the restraint order issued by thisCourt. He submits that this Court could permit SEBI to collect theamount payable to Saharas for adjustment against the outstandingdues. Mr. Datar seeks time to look into the matter and do theneedful. We make it clear that any amount or commodity includinggold which is lying with the spot exchange in the account of anyone of the Sahara companies shall be made over to the SEBI fordeposit in the SEBI Sahara Account. Earlier orders passed by usshall not be taken as an impediment for any suchdisbursement/payment to SEBI in terms of this order.I.A. No. 135-137 of 2015 : M/s.Devendra Rajnikant Ladhani, Anil Ramchandra Gupta, MukeshShivdas Sonar, Directors of the Company who were directed to remainpresent in person to show cause why contempt proceedings be not beinitiated against them are present in the Court. Mr. Paras Kuhad,learned senior counsel has already submitted his reply in this
regard.List the matter again on 11.05.2016.The Directors shall remain present in person on that date.(Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
<7 1 OUT-TODAY ITEM NO. 301 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.As. No. 180-182 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412 & 413 /2012 in C.A. No. 9813 and 9833/2011 and Contempt Petition ) No. 260 of 2013 in Civil Appeal No. 8643 of 2012 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (With office report) Date : 06/05/2016 These I.As were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P.Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, adv. Mr. Purushottam Kumar Jha, Adv. Ms. Niharika, Adv. Mr. Aman Shukla, Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. For Respondent(s)/ Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Applicants Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Jain, Adv. Mr. Ayush Chaudhary, Adv. Ms. Preeti Singh, Adv. Mr. Abhinav Mani Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Nijam Pasha, Adv. Mr. Salim Inamdar, Adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv.Signature Not Verified Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv.Digitally signed bySHASHI SAREENDate: 2016.05.06 Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv.16:37:51 ISTReason: Mr. Kumar Ayush, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Mr. R.S.YAdav, Adv. Mr. Amit Srivastava, Adv. 2 UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R These applications have been filed by Mr. Subrata Roy
Sahara and Mr. Ashok Roy Choudhary presently lodged in the Tiharjail seeking provisional/temporary release of the applicants fromcustody for a period of three weeks on such terms and conditions asmay be stipulated by this Court to enable them to perform thefuneral and other rites of late Smt. Chhabi Roy, mother of Mr.Subrata Roy Sahara. Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel appearing for theapplicants, submits that Smt. Chhabi Roy, mother of theapplicant-Subrata Roy Sahara aged about 95 years old and ailingfor some time, has passed away today at about 1.30 a.m. Hesubmits that the applicants are required to perform the last ritesof the deceased and other ceremonies connected therewith. Hesubmits that the applicants could be permitted to do so on suchterms and conditions as this Court may deem fit and proper. Mr.Arvind Datar, learned senior counsel appearing for SEBIfairly concedes that in the light of the bereavement in the family,the applicants' prayer for temporary release from jail could beconsidered on suitable terms and conditions to be stipulated bythis Court. In the circumstances, therefore, and having regard to thesubmissions made at the Bar, we direct that the applicants, Mr.Subrata Roy Sahara and Ashok Roy Choudhary, presently lodged in 3Tihar jail in Delhi shall be released from the jail temporarilyfor a period of four weeks to enable them to visit Lucknow forperforming the last rites of late Smt. Chabbi Roy and to visitHaridwar and Ganga Sagar for such rites and ceremonies. Therelease of the applicants from Tihar jail shall however be subjectto the following conditions:1) The applicants shall be under protective custody and shall beescorted during their period outside the jail by a team of policeofficials to be deputed by the Commissioner of Police, Delhi,
headed by an officer not less below the rank of Sub-Inspector ofPolice.2) The police officials escorting the applicants during theperiod they are outside the jail shall be in plain clothes. Theapplicants shall not be hand-cuffed at any point of time.3) The police officials escorting the applicants shall reporttheir presence to the jurisdictional police station concerned wherethe applicants are taken in which event the jurisdictional policestation concerned shall at all times provide all such help andsupport to the escort team as may be necessary.4) Upon expiry of the period of four weeks from today, the escortteam shall lodge the applicants back into Tihar jail. Theapplicants shall offer no resistance to that course and shall obeythe escort team without demur.5) The cost including travel, salary and other emoluments of theteam deputed to escort the applicants shall be borne by theapplicants-Saharas. 46) The Commissioner of Police, Delhi, shall be free to raise asuitable bill to SEBI to be paid out of SEBI Sahara RefundAccount. Mr. Sibal assures the Court that the applicants shall atno point of time make any attempt to either escape from theprotective custody of the escort team or otherwise leave thecountry especially when their passports are already deposited withcompetent authority. The Registry shall forthwith convey this order to theCommissioner of Police, Delhi, as also to the Superintendent ofTihar Jail for compliance.(Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
lv1ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSI.A.NOS. 77-79, 89-91, 104-106, 83-85, 144-146, 153-155, 158-160,147, 161-163, 164-165, 166, 167, 168-170, 171-173, 174-176,177-179/2016, 132-134, 135-137/2015, 138-140/2016, 141-143/2016 &131/2015 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412 & 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9813 &9833/2011 AND C.P. (C)NO.260/2013 IN C.A.NO.8643/2012 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(for appropriate orders and impleadment and directions and placing on record additional facts and documents and exemption from filing O.T. and office report)Date : 27/04/2016 These applications were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRIFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Shekhar Napahade, Sr.Adv. (A.C.) Ms. Shubhangi Tuli, Adv. Mr. Vikram Sobti, Adv. Mr. Arvind P.Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, adv. MS. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Purushottam Kumar Jha, Adv. Mr. Anuj Sarma, Adv. MS. Niharika, Adv. Mr. Aman Shukla, Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. For Respondent(s) Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Jain, Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary, adv. MS. Preeti Singh, Adv. Mr. Abhinav Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Nijam Pasha, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv.2 Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv. Mr. Kumar Ayush, adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Vijay KumaR, Adv. Mr. R.S.Yadav, Adv. Mr. Dhirendra Singh, Adv. Mr. Sujit Keshri, Adv. Mr. Arun K. Sinha,Adv. Mr. Paras Kuhas, Sr. Adv. Mr. Omkar Geedh, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Agrawal,Adv. Mr. Jitin Chaturvedi, adv. MS. Swati Vijay Vargiya, Adv. Mr.Rohan Thawani, Adv. MS. Vandana Sehgal, Adv. Mr.Anand Daga, Adv. Mr. Bhushan Mohata, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. Mr. Ramesh Babu M. R.,Adv. MS. Swati Setia, Adv. Mr. D.L.Chidananda, Adv. Ms. Sadhna Sandhu, adv. Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv.
Mrs. Anil Katiyar,Adv. Mr. Sunil Fernandes,Adv. Ms. Astha Sharma, Adv. Mr. Puneeth K.G., Adv. Mr. Yash Pal Dhingra,Adv. Mr. Satyajit A.Desai, adv. Ms. Anagha S. Desai,Adv. Mr. Mithilesh Kumar, Adv. Mr. Sanjib Sen, Sr. Adv. Mr. Amitabh Chaturvedi, adv. Mr. Sumit Shukla, Adv. Mr. S.S.Ray, Adv. Mr. Sanjeev Sachdeva, Adv. Ms. Rakhi Ray,Adv. Mr. Biswajit Bhattacharya, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pawan Upadhayay, adv.3 Ms. Sharmila Upadhyay,Adv. Ms. Vandana Sehgal,Adv. Mr. Manish Vashisht, Adv. Mr. Samir Vashisht, Adv. Dr.(Mrs.) Vipin Gupta,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R I.As. No. 164-165 of 2016 :Learned counsel for the applicants submits that he hasinstructions to withdraw these applications as the claims made bythe applicants stand fully satisfied. I.As. No. 164-165 of 2016are accordingly dismissed as withdrawn.I.A No. 166 of 2016 :Heard.By our Order dated 21.11.2013, we had directed thatSahara Group of Companies shall not part with any moveable andimmoveable properties until further orders from this Court. Thatorder has remained in force ever since. In the present application,the applicant seeks a clarification to the effect that the orderafore-mentioned does not prevent the applicants fromexecuting/enforcing the judgment dated 11.08.2015 passed by NCDRCagainst Sahara India Commercial Corporation Ltd. in ConsumerComplaint No. 47 of 2009. We see no reason to decline that prayer.We accordingly clarify that our Order dated 21.11.2013 passed inConsumer Complaint No. 47 of 2009 in Contempt Petition © No. 412 of2012 in Civil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011 shall not prevent the4applicant from executing the judgment dated 11.08.2015 of the NCDRCpassed against Sahara India Commercial Corporation Limited inConsumer Complaint No. 47 of 2009 in accordance with law.I.A No. 167 of 2016 :Heard.On the analogy of the Order passed in I.A. No. 166 of2016 we clarify that our Order dated 21.11.2013 passed in ConsumerComplaint No. CC/13/17 in Contempt Petition © No. 412 of 2012 inCivil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011 shall not prevent the applicants fromexecuting the judgment dated 07.11.2015 of the State ConsumerDisputes Redressal Commission, Maharashtra, Nagpur passed againstSahara India Commercial Corporation Limited in Consumer ComplaintNo. CC/13/17 in accordance with law.I.A. No. 147 of 2016 :In this application seeking intervention by theapplicants, the applicant's precise grievance appears to be thatComplaint Case No. CC/13/15 filed by him before the State ConsumerDisputes Redressal Commission, Maharashtra, Circuit Bench, Nagpuris not being proceeded with on account of our Order dated21.11.2013 in Contempt Petition No. 412 of 2012 in Civil Appeal No.9813 of 2011. It is submitted by learned counsel for the
intervenor that intervenor-applicant shall be satisfied in case itis clarified that the order passed by this Court on 21.11.2013,whereby this Court restrained the Sahara Group of Companies fromalienating any property moveable or otherwise, does not prevent the5concerned Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission from proceedingwith contempt case filed by the applicants and passing appropriateorders on the same. We see no reason to decline that prayer. Wemake it clear that our dated 21.11.2013 shall not prevent theconcerned Disputes Redressal Commission from proceeding with andpassing orders in accordance with law in pending Complaint Case No.CC/13/15 filed by the applicant. I.A. No. 147 of 2016 is accordingly disposed of with the saiddirection.I.As. No. 153-155 of 2016 :Mr. Biswajit Bhattacharya, learned senior counsel for theapplicants submits that he does not propose to press theseapplications for the present. The applications are dismissed asnot pressed.I.A. No. 131 of 2016 :Heard. Learned counsel for the parties agree that the genuineness ofthe agreement to sell and purchase allegedly entered into betweenSahara India Commercial Corporation Ltd. on the one hand and theapplicant on the other and the payments allegedly made towards saleconsideration of the property agreed to be sold and purchased bythe parties could be left to be verified by Mr. Justice B.N.Agrawalbefore whom the parties agree to present their respective versionssupported by documents. We request Justice Agrawal to look intothe matter and verify whether alleged transaction has been enteredinto by the parties and whether any payment pursuant to the saidtransactions have been paid and received by the purchaser and the6seller, if so, whether said payments are made before the issue ofthe order of restraint dated 21.11.2013 passed by us. We hope andtrust that Justice Agrawal shall submit a status report on thesubject expeditiously but not later than three months from the datea copy of this order is received by him. Post after the needful is done.I.As. No. 174-176 of 2016 :By our order dated 29.03.2016, we had issued severaldirections including a direction to SEBI to devise a suitablemechanism for sale of properties, the title deeds whereof havealready been deposited with it by Saharas. The mechanism for suchsale was to be finalised in consultation with and under thesupervision of Justice B.N.Agrawal, former Judge of this Court.Mr. Arvind P.Datar, learned senior counsel for SEBI has pursuant tothe said directions filed 15 th Status Report of SEBI in which it isinter alia pointed out that SEBI has in consultation with JusticeAgrawal engaged the services of HDFC Reality (a subsidiary ofHousing Development Finance Corporation Ltd.) and SEBI CapitalMarkets Limited (SBICAP), a subsidiary of State Bank of India forauctioning of the properties. The report sets out the terms andconditions on which the afore-mentioned two agencies have agreed toundertake the process of sale and transfer of properties inquestion. Mr. Arvind P.Datar submits that the two agencies engagedby SEBI have been given four months' time to complete the processof effecting the sales. He submits that the first phase of theprocess of sale is to commence in the immediate future and that7given two weeks' time, he should be able to file a further statusreport indicating the progress made in that direction. He furtherstates that the title deeds deposited by Saharas with SEBI need tobe verified, the defects, if any, rectified with the help of theconcerned Sahara companies. Be that as it may, we expect the
agencies engaged by SEBI to take immediate steps for sale of theproperties in question after due and proper verification and aftercompleting all other safeguards necessary for ensuring that theproperties are sold for the optimum price they can fetch.Mr. Datar points out that Saharas have not so far submitted acomplete list of all the properties owned by them. He urged thaton record are found only two lists, one comprising properties atVersova and Vasai and the other enumerating 71 different items ofproperties which include Vasai for a second time. The first listestimates the market value of Versova and Vasai at Rs. 20,443.72crores. The second list comprising 71 items includes Vasai andestimates the value of the property at Rs. 20,172.50 crores. It issubmitted by Mr. Datar that a large number of properties are ownedby Sahara Group of the Companies over and above, the two listsmentioned above, details whereof has not been shared by the Saharasso far with this Court. He urged that Saharas could be directed togive a complete list of all the properties owned by them withprobable value of each such property. Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, learned senior counsel appearing for thecontemnors on the other hand submits that the two lists referred toby Mr. Arvind Datar are not exhaustive. He submitted that he willtake instructions and produce a complete list of all the properties8owned by Saharas over and above those mentioned in the list thatare already filed before this Court.Having said that Dr. Dhavan submitted that given the fact thatthe contemnors have spent more than two years in jail and the factthat SEBI has now been authorised to sell the properties mentionedin the two lists except Ambey Valley, this Court could considergranting parole to the contemnors or in the alternative shiftinghim out of the jail to be held under house arrest so that thecontemnors could also assist in the process of sale of theproperties with or without the intervention of SEBI to raise themoney required to be deposited. He further submitted that if SEBIcould furnish a copy of the title deeds consisting of Versovaproperties of Saharas, the latter may make an attempt to findpurchasers for the said property with a view to raising funds fordeposit with SEBI. Mr. Datar had no objection to a copy of titledeed in question being made available to Saharas. In the circumstances, therefore, we adjourn these matterstill 11.05.2016. Mr. Datar may file an interim report as to theprogress made in the direction of sale of the properties by theagencies. In the meantime Saharas shall file a list of theremaining properties owned by them. Dr. Dhawan at this stage submits that a certain amount ofmoney representing returns on the investment in gold andcommodities (Spot Exchange) is lying to the credit of Sahara Q ShopUnique Products Range Ltd. with the National Spot Exchange. It issubmitted that Sahara Q Shop Unique Products Range Limited appearto have approached the spot exchange for payment which request was9opposed by SEBI in view of the restraint order issued by thisCourt. He submits that this Court could permit SEBI to collect theamount payable to Saharas for adjustment against the outstandingdues. Mr. Datar seeks time to look into the matter and do theneedful. We make it clear that any amount or commodity includinggold which is lying with the spot exchange in the account of anyone of the Sahara companies shall be made over to the SEBI fordeposit in the SEBI Sahara Account. Earlier orders passed by usshall not be taken as an impediment for any suchdisbursement/payment to SEBI in terms of this order.I.A. No. 135-137 of 2015 : M/s.Devendra Rajnikant Ladhani, Anil Ramchandra Gupta, MukeshShivdas Sonar, Directors of the Company who were directed to remainpresent in person to show cause why contempt proceedings be not beinitiated against them are present in the Court. Mr. Paras Kuhad,learned senior counsel has already submitted his reply in this
regard.List the matter again on 11.05.2016.The Directors shall remain present in person on that date.(Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
ITEM NO.810 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A.No.166 & 167 of 2016 IN CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (With office report) Date : 26/04/2016 These applications were mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT For Petitioner(s) Ms. Vandana Sehgal, Adv. (mentioned by) For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List I.A. No.166/2016 and 167/2016 in Contempt Petition (C) No.412 of 2012 in C.A. No.9813 of 2011 along other connected matters on 27 th April, 2016. (Ashok Raj Singh) (Veena Khera) Court Master Court Master
B ITEM NO.810 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A.No.166 & 167 of 2016 IN CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (With office report) Date : 26/04/2016 These applications were mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT For Petitioner(s) Ms. Vandana Sehgal, Adv. (mentioned by) For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List I.A. No.166/2016 and 167/2016 in Contempt Petition (C) No.412 of 2012 in C.A. No.9813 of 2011 along other connected matters on 27th April, 2016. (Ashok Raj Singh) (Veena Khera) Court Master Court MasterSignature Not VerifiedDigitally signed byASHOK RAJ SINGHDate: 2016.04.2617:23:20 ISTReason:
ITEM NO.822 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. No.... of 2016 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (Appln. For impleadment and placing on record additional facts and documents and exem. From filing O.T.) Date : 25/04/2016 This I.A. was mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT For Petitioner(s) Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh,Adv. Ms. Sujata Kurdukar,Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. Mr. Manish Vashisht, Adv. Dr. (Mrs.) Vipin Gupta, Adv. (Mentioned by) Mr. Amotabh Chaturvedi, Adv. Ms. Rakhi Ray, Adv. (Mentioned by) UPON being mentioned the Court made the following O R D E R As and when the Bench hearing Contempt Petition No. 412 of 2012 in Civil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011 is constituted, list I.As. No. ... of 2016 along with the said petition. (Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
ì ITEM NO.822 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. No.... of 2016 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (Appln. For impleadment and placing on record additional facts and documents and exem. From filing O.T.) Date : 25/04/2016 This I.A. was mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT For Petitioner(s) Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh,Adv. Ms. Sujata Kurdukar,Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. Mr. Manish Vashisht, Adv. Dr. (Mrs.) Vipin Gupta, Adv. (Mentioned by) Mr. Amotabh Chaturvedi, Adv. Ms. Rakhi Ray, Adv. (Mentioned by) UPON being mentioned the Court made the following O R D E R As and when the Bench hearing Contempt Petition No. 412 of 2012 in Civil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011 is constituted, list I.As. No. ... of 2016 along with the said petition.Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed bySHASHI SAREENDate: 2016.04.2617:16:17 ISTReason: (Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
ì ITEM NO.822 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. No.... of 2016 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (Appln. For impleadment and placing on record additional facts and documents and exem. From filing O.T.) Date : 25/04/2016 This I.A. was mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT For Petitioner(s) Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh,Adv. Ms. Sujata Kurdukar,Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. Mr. Manish Vashisht, Adv. Dr. (Mrs.) Vipin Gupta, Adv. (Mentioned by) Mr. Amotabh Chaturvedi, Adv. Ms. Rakhi Ray, Adv. (Mentioned by) UPON being mentioned the Court made the following O R D E R As and when the Bench hearing Contempt Petition No. 412 of 2012 in Civil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011 is constituted, list I.As. No. ... of 2016 along with the said petition.Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed bySHASHI SAREENDate: 2016.04.2617:16:17 ISTReason: (Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
ì ITEM NO.822 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. No.... of 2016 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (Appln. For impleadment and placing on record additional facts and documents and exem. From filing O.T.) Date : 25/04/2016 This I.A. was mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT For Petitioner(s) Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh,Adv. Ms. Sujata Kurdukar,Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. Mr. Manish Vashisht, Adv. Dr. (Mrs.) Vipin Gupta, Adv. (Mentioned by) Mr. Amotabh Chaturvedi, Adv. Ms. Rakhi Ray, Adv. (Mentioned by) UPON being mentioned the Court made the following O R D E R As and when the Bench hearing Contempt Petition No. 412 of 2012 in Civil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011 is constituted, list I.As. No. ... of 2016 along with the said petition.Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed bySHASHI SAREENDate: 2016.04.2617:16:17 ISTReason: (Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
ì ITEM NO.822 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. No.... of 2016 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (Appln. For impleadment and placing on record additional facts and documents and exem. From filing O.T.) Date : 25/04/2016 This I.A. was mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT For Petitioner(s) Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh,Adv. Ms. Sujata Kurdukar,Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. Mr. Manish Vashisht, Adv. Dr. (Mrs.) Vipin Gupta, Adv. (Mentioned by) Mr. Amotabh Chaturvedi, Adv. Ms. Rakhi Ray, Adv. (Mentioned by) UPON being mentioned the Court made the following O R D E R As and when the Bench hearing Contempt Petition No. 412 of 2012 in Civil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011 is constituted, list I.As. No. ... of 2016 along with the said petition.Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed bySHASHI SAREENDate: 2016.04.2617:16:17 ISTReason: (Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
ì ITEM NO.822 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. No.... of 2016 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (Appln. For impleadment and placing on record additional facts and documents and exem. From filing O.T.) Date : 25/04/2016 This I.A. was mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT For Petitioner(s) Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh,Adv. Ms. Sujata Kurdukar,Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. Mr. Manish Vashisht, Adv. Dr. (Mrs.) Vipin Gupta, Adv. (Mentioned by) Mr. Amotabh Chaturvedi, Adv. Ms. Rakhi Ray, Adv. (Mentioned by) UPON being mentioned the Court made the following O R D E R As and when the Bench hearing Contempt Petition No. 412 of 2012 in Civil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011 is constituted, list I.As. No. ... of 2016 along with the said petition.Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed bySHASHI SAREENDate: 2016.04.2617:16:17 ISTReason: (Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
ì ITEM NO.822 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. No.... of 2016 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (Appln. For impleadment and placing on record additional facts and documents and exem. From filing O.T.) Date : 25/04/2016 This I.A. was mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT For Petitioner(s) Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh,Adv. Ms. Sujata Kurdukar,Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. Mr. Manish Vashisht, Adv. Dr. (Mrs.) Vipin Gupta, Adv. (Mentioned by) Mr. Amotabh Chaturvedi, Adv. Ms. Rakhi Ray, Adv. (Mentioned by) UPON being mentioned the Court made the following O R D E R As and when the Bench hearing Contempt Petition No. 412 of 2012 in Civil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011 is constituted, list I.As. No. ... of 2016 along with the said petition.Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed bySHASHI SAREENDate: 2016.04.2617:16:17 ISTReason: (Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
ì ITEM NO.822 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. No.... of 2016 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (Appln. For impleadment and placing on record additional facts and documents and exem. From filing O.T.) Date : 25/04/2016 This I.A. was mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT For Petitioner(s) Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh,Adv. Ms. Sujata Kurdukar,Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. Mr. Manish Vashisht, Adv. Dr. (Mrs.) Vipin Gupta, Adv. (Mentioned by) Mr. Amotabh Chaturvedi, Adv. Ms. Rakhi Ray, Adv. (Mentioned by) UPON being mentioned the Court made the following O R D E R As and when the Bench hearing Contempt Petition No. 412 of 2012 in Civil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011 is constituted, list I.As. No. ... of 2016 along with the said petition.Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed bySHASHI SAREENDate: 2016.04.2617:16:17 ISTReason: (Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
ì ITEM NO.822 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. No.... of 2016 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (Appln. For impleadment and placing on record additional facts and documents and exem. From filing O.T.) Date : 25/04/2016 This I.A. was mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT For Petitioner(s) Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh,Adv. Ms. Sujata Kurdukar,Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. Mr. Manish Vashisht, Adv. Dr. (Mrs.) Vipin Gupta, Adv. (Mentioned by) Mr. Amotabh Chaturvedi, Adv. Ms. Rakhi Ray, Adv. (Mentioned by) UPON being mentioned the Court made the following O R D E R As and when the Bench hearing Contempt Petition No. 412 of 2012 in Civil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011 is constituted, list I.As. No. ... of 2016 along with the said petition.Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed bySHASHI SAREENDate: 2016.04.2617:16:17 ISTReason: (Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
ì ITEM NO.822 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. No.... of 2016 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (Appln. For impleadment and placing on record additional facts and documents and exem. From filing O.T.) Date : 25/04/2016 This I.A. was mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT For Petitioner(s) Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh,Adv. Ms. Sujata Kurdukar,Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. Mr. Manish Vashisht, Adv. Dr. (Mrs.) Vipin Gupta, Adv. (Mentioned by) Mr. Amotabh Chaturvedi, Adv. Ms. Rakhi Ray, Adv. (Mentioned by) UPON being mentioned the Court made the following O R D E R As and when the Bench hearing Contempt Petition No. 412 of 2012 in Civil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011 is constituted, list I.As. No. ... of 2016 along with the said petition.Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed bySHASHI SAREENDate: 2016.04.2617:16:17 ISTReason: (Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
ì ITEM NO.822 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. No.... of 2016 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (Appln. For impleadment and placing on record additional facts and documents and exem. From filing O.T.) Date : 25/04/2016 This I.A. was mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT For Petitioner(s) Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh,Adv. Ms. Sujata Kurdukar,Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. Mr. Manish Vashisht, Adv. Dr. (Mrs.) Vipin Gupta, Adv. (Mentioned by) Mr. Amotabh Chaturvedi, Adv. Ms. Rakhi Ray, Adv. (Mentioned by) UPON being mentioned the Court made the following O R D E R As and when the Bench hearing Contempt Petition No. 412 of 2012 in Civil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011 is constituted, list I.As. No. ... of 2016 along with the said petition.Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed bySHASHI SAREENDate: 2016.04.2617:16:17 ISTReason: (Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
ì ITEM NO.822 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. No.... of 2016 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (Appln. For impleadment and placing on record additional facts and documents and exem. From filing O.T.) Date : 25/04/2016 This I.A. was mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT For Petitioner(s) Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh,Adv. Ms. Sujata Kurdukar,Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. Mr. Manish Vashisht, Adv. Dr. (Mrs.) Vipin Gupta, Adv. (Mentioned by) Mr. Amotabh Chaturvedi, Adv. Ms. Rakhi Ray, Adv. (Mentioned by) UPON being mentioned the Court made the following O R D E R As and when the Bench hearing Contempt Petition No. 412 of 2012 in Civil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011 is constituted, list I.As. No. ... of 2016 along with the said petition.Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed bySHASHI SAREENDate: 2016.04.2617:16:17 ISTReason: (Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
ì ITEM NO.822 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. No.... of 2016 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (Appln. For impleadment and placing on record additional facts and documents and exem. From filing O.T.) Date : 25/04/2016 This I.A. was mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT For Petitioner(s) Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh,Adv. Ms. Sujata Kurdukar,Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. Mr. Manish Vashisht, Adv. Dr. (Mrs.) Vipin Gupta, Adv. (Mentioned by) Mr. Amotabh Chaturvedi, Adv. Ms. Rakhi Ray, Adv. (Mentioned by) UPON being mentioned the Court made the following O R D E R As and when the Bench hearing Contempt Petition No. 412 of 2012 in Civil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011 is constituted, list I.As. No. ... of 2016 along with the said petition.Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed bySHASHI SAREENDate: 2016.04.2617:16:17 ISTReason: (Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
ì ITEM NO.822 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. No.... of 2016 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (Appln. For impleadment and placing on record additional facts and documents and exem. From filing O.T.) Date : 25/04/2016 This I.A. was mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT For Petitioner(s) Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh,Adv. Ms. Sujata Kurdukar,Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. Mr. Manish Vashisht, Adv. Dr. (Mrs.) Vipin Gupta, Adv. (Mentioned by) Mr. Amotabh Chaturvedi, Adv. Ms. Rakhi Ray, Adv. (Mentioned by) UPON being mentioned the Court made the following O R D E R As and when the Bench hearing Contempt Petition No. 412 of 2012 in Civil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011 is constituted, list I.As. No. ... of 2016 along with the said petition.Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed bySHASHI SAREENDate: 2016.04.2517:17:13 ISTReason: (Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
ì ITEM NO.822 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. No.... of 2016 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (Appln. For impleadment and placing on record additional facts and documents and exem. From filing O.T.) Date : 25/04/2016 This I.A. was mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT For Petitioner(s) Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh,Adv. Ms. Sujata Kurdukar,Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. Mr. Manish Vashisht, Adv. Dr. (Mrs.) Vipin Gupta, Adv. (Mentioned by) Mr. Amotabh Chaturvedi, Adv. Ms. Rakhi Ray, Adv. (Mentioned by) UPON being mentioned the Court made the following O R D E R As and when the Bench hearing Contempt Petition No. 412 of 2012 in Civil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011 is constituted, list I.As. No. ... of 2016 along with the said petition.Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed bySHASHI SAREENDate: 2016.04.2617:16:17 ISTReason: (Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
ì ITEM NO.822 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. No.... of 2016 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (Appln. For impleadment and placing on record additional facts and documents and exem. From filing O.T.) Date : 25/04/2016 This I.A. was mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT For Petitioner(s) Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh,Adv. Ms. Sujata Kurdukar,Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. Mr. Manish Vashisht, Adv. Dr. (Mrs.) Vipin Gupta, Adv. (Mentioned by) Mr. Amotabh Chaturvedi, Adv. Ms. Rakhi Ray, Adv. (Mentioned by) UPON being mentioned the Court made the following O R D E R As and when the Bench hearing Contempt Petition No. 412 of 2012 in Civil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011 is constituted, list I.As. No. ... of 2016 along with the said petition.Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed bySHASHI SAREENDate: 2016.04.2617:16:17 ISTReason: (Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
ì ITEM NO.822 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. No.... of 2016 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (Appln. For impleadment and placing on record additional facts and documents and exem. From filing O.T.) Date : 25/04/2016 This I.A. was mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT For Petitioner(s) Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh,Adv. Ms. Sujata Kurdukar,Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. Mr. Manish Vashisht, Adv. Dr. (Mrs.) Vipin Gupta, Adv. (Mentioned by) Mr. Amotabh Chaturvedi, Adv. Ms. Rakhi Ray, Adv. (Mentioned by) UPON being mentioned the Court made the following O R D E R As and when the Bench hearing Contempt Petition No. 412 of 2012 in Civil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011 is constituted, list I.As. No. ... of 2016 along with the said petition.Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed bySHASHI SAREENDate: 2016.04.2617:16:17 ISTReason: (Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
ì ITEM NO.822 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. No.... of 2016 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (Appln. For impleadment and placing on record additional facts and documents and exem. From filing O.T.) Date : 25/04/2016 This I.A. was mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT For Petitioner(s) Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh,Adv. Ms. Sujata Kurdukar,Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. Mr. Manish Vashisht, Adv. Dr. (Mrs.) Vipin Gupta, Adv. (Mentioned by) Mr. Amotabh Chaturvedi, Adv. Ms. Rakhi Ray, Adv. (Mentioned by) UPON being mentioned the Court made the following O R D E R As and when the Bench hearing Contempt Petition No. 412 of 2012 in Civil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011 is constituted, list I.As. No. ... of 2016 along with the said petition.Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed bySHASHI SAREENDate: 2016.04.2617:16:17 ISTReason: (Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
ì ITEM NO.822 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. No.... of 2016 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (Appln. For impleadment and placing on record additional facts and documents and exem. From filing O.T.) Date : 25/04/2016 This I.A. was mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT For Petitioner(s) Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh,Adv. Ms. Sujata Kurdukar,Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. Mr. Manish Vashisht, Adv. Dr. (Mrs.) Vipin Gupta, Adv. (Mentioned by) Mr. Amotabh Chaturvedi, Adv. Ms. Rakhi Ray, Adv. (Mentioned by) UPON being mentioned the Court made the following O R D E R As and when the Bench hearing Contempt Petition No. 412 of 2012 in Civil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011 is constituted, list I.As. No. ... of 2016 along with the said petition.Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed bySHASHI SAREENDate: 2016.04.2617:16:17 ISTReason: (Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
ì ITEM NO.822 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. No.... of 2016 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (Appln. For impleadment and placing on record additional facts and documents and exem. From filing O.T.) Date : 25/04/2016 This I.A. was mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT For Petitioner(s) Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh,Adv. Ms. Sujata Kurdukar,Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. Mr. Manish Vashisht, Adv. Dr. (Mrs.) Vipin Gupta, Adv. (Mentioned by) Mr. Amotabh Chaturvedi, Adv. Ms. Rakhi Ray, Adv. (Mentioned by) UPON being mentioned the Court made the following O R D E R As and when the Bench hearing Contempt Petition No. 412 of 2012 in Civil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011 is constituted, list I.As. No. ... of 2016 along with the said petition.Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed bySHASHI SAREENDate: 2016.04.2617:16:17 ISTReason: (Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
1 ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. 77-79, 89-91, 135-137, 104-106, 83-85, 119-121/2015, 144-146/2016, 132-134, 135-137/2015,138-140/2016, 141-143/2016 & 131/2015 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412 & 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9813 & 9833/2011 No(s). S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (for appropriate orders and office report) WITH CONMT.PET.(C) No. 260/2013 In C.A. No. 8643/2012 Date : 29/03/2016 These applications were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Purushottam Kumar Jha, Adv. Mr. Anuj Sarma, Adv. Ms. Niharika, Adv. Mr. Vishwajit Bhattacharya, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pawan Upadhyay, Adv. Mr. Sarvjit Pratap Singh, Adv. Ms. Sharmila Upadhyay, Adv. Mr. Sunil Fernandes, Adv. Ms. Astha Sharma, Adv. Ms. Mithu Jain, Adv. Mr. Puneeth K.G., Adv. Mr. Yashpal Dhingra, Adv. Mr. Saurabh Kripal, Adv. Ms. Shreya Mishra, Adv. Mr. Rahul Dhawan, Adv. Mr. Shailash Tiwari, Adv. Ms. Ridhi Madan, Adv.
2 Mr. Tushar Mehta, ASG Mr. Gurukrishna Kumar, Sr.Adv. Mr. D.L.Chidananda, Adv. Ms. Sadhna Sandhu, Adv. Mr. B.V. Balramdas, Adv. Ms. Anil Katiyar, Adv. Mr. Satyajit A. Desai, Adv. Mr. Mithilesh Kumar, Adv. Ms. Anagh S. Desai, Adv. Mr. Shekhar Naphade, Sr. Adv. Ms. Shubhanghi Tuli, Adv. Mr. Vikram Sobti, Adv. Mr. Paras Kuhad, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gaurav Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Omkar Geedu, Adv. Mr. Jitin Chaturvedi, Adv. Ms. Swati Vijay Vargiya, Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Shyam Divan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gopal Jain, Sr. Adv. (For Divine Infra- Mr. S.S. Ray, Adv. Solutions pvt. Ltd.)Mr. Sanjeev Sachdeva, Adv. Mr. Anish Jain, Adv. Ms. Rakhi Ray, Adv. Mr. Tushar Mehta, ASG Mr. Guru Krishna Kumar, Sr. Adv. Mr. D.L. Chidananda, Adv. Ms. Sadhana Sandhu, Adv. Mr. B.V. Balramdas, Adv. Mr. Prag Tripati, Sr. Adv. Mr. Ramesh Babu, Adv. Ms. Swati Sethia, Adv. Mr. Rajeev Dhawan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Sujit Keshri, Adv. Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Jain, Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv.
3 Ms. Preeti Singh, Adv. Mr. Abhinav Mani Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Nijam Pasha, Adv. Mr. Simrajeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Mr. R.S. Yadav, Adv. Mr. Kumar Ayush, Adv. Mr. Ramesh Babu M. R., Adv. Ms. Indra Sawhney, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R I.A. No.153-155 of 2016 Issue notice. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, learned senior counsel may file his objections to these applications within two weeks. I.A. Nos.158-160 of 2016 Mr.Venugopal may file his objections to these applications within two weeks. We permit SEBI to receive and encash 357 cheques handed over by Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel today on behalf of Sahara Group as the balance sale consideration for the Sahara properties. Personal appearance of the Director of the applicant company, namely, M/s Divine Infrasolutions Pvt. Ltd. shall stand exempted for future hearings subject to the clearance of the cheques for payment. I.A. No.151-152 of 2016 Heard. We see no reason to entertain these applications at this stage. These applications are accordingly dismissed.
4 I.A. No.147 of 2016 Issue notice. Learned counsel opposite may file their objections to this application within four weeks. Sahara shall while responding to the application set out the details of the project in which the application for intervention has been filed and of all other similar projects which are either completed or under completion all over the country. The time within which the projects shall be completed and the extent of investment required to complete the same shall also be indicated on an approximate basis. I.A. No.135-137 of 2015 A reply has been filed on behalf of M/s Sai Rydam Realtors Pvt. Ltd., the purchasers of 270.77 acres of land situated at Vasai, Bombay. Mr.Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel may file a rejoinder affidavit to the reply affidavit within four weeks. We are prima facie of the view that the purchasers have despite an undertaking given to this Court failed to deposit the balance amount of Rs.981.50 crores without any lawful justification. We, therefore, see no reason why a notice should not be issued to the Managing Director and the Directors of the said company to show cause why proceedings for contempt of this Court should not be initiated against them. Notice shall be returnable within four weeks. The noticees viz. Shri Devendra Rajnikant Ladhani, Director, Shri Anil Ramchandra Gupta, Director and Shri Mukesh Shivdas Sonar, Director who shall remain present in person before the Court on the next date of hearing.
5 I.A. No.119-121 of 2016 Learned counsel for the parties submit that these applications have been rendered infructuous and may therefore be dismissed. We order accordingly. I.A No.144-146 of 2016 List these applications along with I.A. No.104-106 of 2015 filed by SEBI. Objections, if any, be filed by learned counsel opposite in the meantime. I.A. No.138-140 of 2016 Mr.Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel submits on instructions that Saharas have already handed over title deeds in respect of 86 properties owned by the Sahara Group worth more than Rs.20,000/- crores. These properties according to Mr.Kapil Sibal are encumbered. Mr. Kapil Sibal submits that, according to his instructions, another list of properties has also been furnished to SEBI comprising properties worth an additional Rs.20,000/- crores. Mr. Arvind Datar, learned senior counsel seeks time to verify whether a second list of properties has been given. Mr. Kapil Sibal further submits that the properties mentioned in the two lists could be sold by SEBI for realizing the required amount to be deposited as a condition for release of the contemnors from jail. Mr. Datar, in reply, submits that SEBI will have no objection to do so if directed by this Court. SEBI can initiate the process of selling the properties covered by the lists mentioned above with or without the assistance of an expert agency engaged for that purpose under the supervision of
6 Hon'ble Mr. Justice B.N. Agrawal, named by this Court to supervise the refund of the amounts by the Saharas. Mr. Sibal, learned senior counsel appearing for the Sahara has no objection in case SEBI is allowed to do the needful. We, accordingly, direct that SEBI shall be free to devise a suitable mechanism for sale of properties the title deeds whereof have already been deposited with it by Saharas in consultation and under the supervision of Justice B.N. Agrawal, former Judge of this Court. SEBI shall keep Saharas duly informed about the steps taken by it in which event Sahara shall be free to provide such inputs as may be considered necessary so that the properties fetch a fair price towards sale consideration. We make it clear that SEBI shall not sell any property owned by Saharas for a price less than 90% of the circle rates for the area in question without the permission of this Court. I.A. No.156-157 of 2016 These applications have been filed by SEBI for permitting the Saharas to make refund to those OFCD holders of Saharas who have made multiple deposits in cash irrespective of the amount invested by such investors. The prayer is not opposed by Saharas. We, accordingly, allow these applications and permit SEBI to refund the amount to OFCD holders who have made multiple deposit in cash irrespective of the amount deposited by the holders. List again along with I.A. Nos.104-106 of 2015 filed by SEBI and all other pending applications for hearing on 27.04.2016 at 2.00 p.m. (Ashok Raj Singh) (Saroj Saini) Court Master Court Master
\236I1ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSI.A. 77-79, 89-91, 135-137, 104-106, 83-85, 119-121/2015,144-146/2016, 132-134, 135-137/2015,138-140/2016, 141-143/2016 &131/2015 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412 & 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9813 &9833/2011 No(s). S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(for appropriate orders and office report)WITHCONMT.PET.(C) No. 260/2013 In C.A. No. 8643/2012Date : 29/03/2016 These applications were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRIFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv.Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv.Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv.Mr. Purushottam Kumar Jha, Adv.Mr. Anuj Sarma, Adv.Ms. Niharika, Adv.Mr. Vishwajit Bhattacharya, Sr. Adv.Mr. Pawan Upadhyay, Adv.Mr. Sarvjit Pratap Singh, Adv.Ms. Sharmila Upadhyay, Adv.Mr. Sunil Fernandes, Adv.Ms. Astha Sharma, Adv.Ms. Mithu Jain, Adv.Mr. Puneeth K.G., Adv.Mr. Yashpal Dhingra, Adv.Mr. Saurabh Kripal, Adv.Ms. Shreya Mishra, Adv.Mr. Rahul Dhawan, Adv.Mr. Shailash Tiwari, Adv.Ms. Ridhi Madan, Adv.2Mr. Tushar Mehta, ASGMr. Gurukrishna Kumar, Sr.Adv.Mr. D.L.Chidananda, Adv.Ms. Sadhna Sandhu, Adv.Mr. B.V. Balramdas, Adv.Ms. Anil Katiyar, Adv.Mr. Satyajit A. Desai, Adv.Mr. Mithilesh Kumar, Adv.Ms. Anagh S. Desai, Adv.Mr. Shekhar Naphade, Sr. Adv.Ms. Shubhanghi Tuli, Adv.Mr. Vikram Sobti, Adv.Mr. Paras Kuhad, Sr. Adv.Mr. Gaurav Agarwal, Adv.Mr. Omkar Geedu, Adv.Mr. Jitin Chaturvedi, Adv.Ms. Swati Vijay Vargiya, Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Shyam Divan, Sr. Adv.Mr. Gopal Jain, Sr. Adv.(For Divine Infra- Mr. S.S. Ray, Adv.Solutions pvt. Ltd.)Mr. Sanjeev Sachdeva, Adv.Mr. Anish Jain, Adv.
Ms. Rakhi Ray, Adv.Mr. Tushar Mehta, ASGMr. Guru Krishna Kumar, Sr. Adv.Mr. D.L. Chidananda, Adv.Ms. Sadhana Sandhu, Adv.Mr. B.V. Balramdas, Adv.Mr. Prag Tripati, Sr. Adv.Mr. Ramesh Babu, Adv.Ms. Swati Sethia, Adv.Mr. Rajeev Dhawan, Sr. Adv.Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv.Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv.Mr. Sujit Keshri, Adv.Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv.Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, Sr. Adv.Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv.Mr. Nikhil Jain, Adv.Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv.3Ms. Preeti Singh, Adv.Mr. Abhinav Mani Tripathi, Adv.Mr. Nijam Pasha, Adv.Mr. Simrajeet Singh, Adv.Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv.Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv.Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv.Mr. R.S. Yadav, Adv.Mr. Kumar Ayush, Adv. Mr. Ramesh Babu M. R., Adv. Ms. Indra Sawhney, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RI.A. No.153-155 of 2016Issue notice.Mr. Pratap Venugopal, learned senior counsel may file hisobjections to these applications within two weeks.I.A. Nos.158-160 of 2016Mr.Venugopal may file his objections to these applicationswithin two weeks. We permit SEBI to receive and encash 357cheques handed over by Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counseltoday on behalf of Sahara Group as the balance saleconsideration for the Sahara properties.Personal appearance of the Director of the applicantcompany, namely, M/s Divine Infrasolutions Pvt. Ltd. shallstand exempted for future hearings subject to the clearance ofthe cheques for payment.I.A. No.151-152 of 2016Heard.We see no reason to entertain these applications at thisstage. These applications are accordingly dismissed.4I.A. No.147 of 2016Issue notice.Learned counsel opposite may file their objections to thisapplication within four weeks. Sahara shall while respondingto the application set out the details of the project in whichthe application for intervention has been filed and of allother similar projects which are either completed or undercompletion all over the country. The time within which theprojects shall be completed and the extent of investmentrequired to complete the same shall also be indicated on anapproximate basis.I.A. No.135-137 of 2015
A reply has been filed on behalf of M/s Sai Rydam RealtorsPvt. Ltd., the purchasers of 270.77 acres of land situated atVasai, Bombay. Mr.Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel mayfile a rejoinder affidavit to the reply affidavit within fourweeks. We are prima facie of the view that the purchasers havedespite an undertaking given to this Court failed to depositthe balance amount of Rs.981.50 crores without any lawfuljustification. We, therefore, see no reason why a noticeshould not be issued to the Managing Director and the Directorsof the said company to show cause why proceedings for contemptof this Court should not be initiated against them. Noticeshall be returnable within four weeks. The noticees viz.Shri Devendra Rajnikant Ladhani, Director, Shri Anil RamchandraGupta, Director and Shri Mukesh Shivdas Sonar, Director whoshall remain present in person before the Court on the nextdate of hearing.5I.A. No.119-121 of 2016Learned counsel for the parties submit that theseapplications have been rendered infructuous and may thereforebe dismissed. We order accordingly.I.A No.144-146 of 2016List these applications along with I.A. No.104-106 of 2015filed by SEBI.Objections, if any, be filed by learned counsel oppositein the meantime.I.A. No.138-140 of 2016Mr.Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel submits oninstructions that Saharas have already handed over title deedsin respect of 86 properties owned by the Sahara Group worthmore than Rs.20,000/- crores. These properties according toMr.Kapil Sibal are encumbered. Mr. Kapil Sibal submits that,according to his instructions, another list of properties hasalso been furnished to SEBI comprising properties worth anadditional Rs.20,000/- crores. Mr. Arvind Datar, learnedsenior counsel seeks time to verify whether a second list ofproperties has been given.Mr. Kapil Sibal further submits that the propertiesmentioned in the two lists could be sold by SEBI for realizingthe required amount to be deposited as a condition for releaseof the contemnors from jail.Mr. Datar, in reply, submits that SEBI will have noobjection to do so if directed by this Court. SEBI caninitiate the process of selling the properties covered by thelists mentioned above with or without the assistance of anexpert agency engaged for that purpose under the supervision of6Hon'ble Mr. Justice B.N. Agrawal, named by this Court tosupervise the refund of the amounts by the Saharas. Mr. Sibal,learned senior counsel appearing for the Sahara has noobjection in case SEBI is allowed to do the needful.We, accordingly, direct that SEBI shall be free to devisea suitable mechanism for sale of properties the title deedswhereof have already been deposited with it by Saharas inconsultation and under the supervision of Justice B.N. Agrawal,former Judge of this Court. SEBI shall keep Saharas dulyinformed about the steps taken by it in which event Saharashall be free to provide such inputs as may be considerednecessary so that the properties fetch a fair price towardssale consideration. We make it clear that SEBI shall not sellany property owned by Saharas for a price less than 90% of thecircle rates for the area in question without the permission ofthis Court.I.A. No.156-157 of 2016These applications have been filed by SEBI for permittingthe Saharas to make refund to those OFCD holders of Saharas who
have made multiple deposits in cash irrespective of the amountinvested by such investors. The prayer is not opposed bySaharas. We, accordingly, allow these applications and permitSEBI to refund the amount to OFCD holders who have mademultiple deposit in cash irrespective of the amount depositedby the holders.List again along with I.A. Nos.104-106 of 2015 filed bySEBI and all other pending applications for hearing on27.04.2016 at 2.00 p.m. (Ashok Raj Singh) (Saroj Saini) Court Master Court Master
ITEM NO.802 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A.No.153-155 OF 2016 IN CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 & 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 & 9833 of 2011 and Contempt Petition (C) No.260 of 2013 in Civil Appeal No.8643 of 2012 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.& ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 28/03/2016 These applications were mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT For Petitioner(s) (For applicant) Ms. Sharmila Upadhyay, Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List these applications tomorrow on 29 th March, 2016 along with other connected matters. (Ashok Raj Singh) (Veena Khera) Court Master Court Master
Æ ITEM NO.802 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A.No.153-155 OF 2016 IN CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 & 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 & 9833 of 2011 and Contempt Petition (C) No.260 of 2013 in Civil Appeal No.8643 of 2012 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.& ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 28/03/2016 These applications were mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT For Petitioner(s) (For applicant) Ms. Sharmila Upadhyay, Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List these applications tomorrow on 29th March, 2016 along with other connected matters. (Ashok Raj Singh) (Veena Khera) Court Master Court MasterSignature Not VerifiedDigitally signed byASHOK RAJ SINGHDate: 2016.04.0417:03:25 ISTReason:
1 ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. NOS. 90-91/2014, 104-106/2015, 119-121/2015, 144-146/2016, 132-134/2015, 135-137/2015, 138-140/2016, 141-143/2016 & 131/2015 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412 & 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9813 & 9833/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.& ORS. Respondent(s) (for appropriate orders and directions and impleadment and intervention and office report) WITH CONMT.PET.(C) No. 260/2013 In C.A.No. 8643/2012 (With Office Report) Date : 02/02/2016 These applications were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Shyam Diwan, Sr. Adv. (For applicant/ Mr. Sunil Fernandes, Adv. intervenor) Mr. Nishith Dhruva, Adv. Ms. Astha Sharma, Adv. Mr. Puneeth K.G., Adv. Mr. Tushar Mehta, ASG (Income Tax Mr. Guru Krishna Kumar, Sr. Adv. Department) Mr. D.L. Chidananda, Adv. Ms. Sadhna Sandhu, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar, Adv. Mr. B.V. Balaramdas, Adv. Mr. Gopal Jain, Adv. (For Divine Mrs. Rakhi Ray, Adv. Infra Solution Mr. S.S. Ray, Adv. Pvt. Ltd.) Mr. Vaibhav Gulia, Adv. Mr. Shekhar Napahade, Adv. Sr. Adv. (ac),Adv. Mr. Vikram Sobti, Adv. Ms. Subhangi Tulsi, Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co., For Respondent(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv.
2 Mr. Nikhil Jain, Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Ms. Preeti Singh, Adv. Mr. Nijam Pasha, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Mr. Abhinav Tripathi, Adv. Mr. R.S. Yadav, Adv. Mr. Manoj V. George, Adv. Mr. Siju Thomas, Adv. Ms. Shilpa M. George, Adv. Mr. Rohit Adlakha, Adv. Mr. Towseef Ahmad Dar, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kajriwal, Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Surjit Keshri, Adv. Mr. Parag Tripathi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Ramesh Babu M.R., Adv. Ms. Swati Setia, Adv. Mr. Ramesh Babu, Adv. Ms. Pinky Anand, ASG Mr. Karan Seth, Adv. Mr. Rishabh Jain, Adv. Ms. Saudamini Sharma, Adv. Mr. Sanchit Kumar, Adv. Mr. G.K Kumar, Adv. (Union of India) Mr. Arijit Prasad, Adv. Mr. M.P. Gupta, Adv. Mr. Paras Kuhad, Sr. Adv. Mr. Omkar Geedh, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Agarwal, Adv. Ms. Rakhi Ray, Adv. Mr. Y.P. Dhingra,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R I.A. No.77-79 of 2015 Taken on Board. By our order dated 03.08.2015 we had directed Mr. Gairi Shankar Singh, Director and authorized representative of M/s Divine Infra Solutions Pvt. Ltd. to remain present in this Court on the
3 next date of hearing. Despite the said direction he is not present today. Though no reply seems to have been filed on behalf of Divine Infra Solutions Pvt. Ltd., learned counsel for the company submits that a reply has already been filed. The Office is directed to locate and place the same on record. Mr. Gauri Shankar Singh shall remain present in person on the next date of hearing to show cause why he should not be proceeded against for breach of the undertaking dated 08.01.2015 furnished by him to this Court. Mr. Gairi Shankar Singh shall all the same have the liberty of making the deposit in terms of the undertaking furnished on or before next date of hearing. List I.A. No.77-79 of 2015 on 29.03.2016 at 2.00 p.m. I.A. No.89-91/2015 Taken on Board. Issue notice to Divine Infra Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Mr. S.S. Ray, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of the said respondent. He shall file his objection to the applications within two weeks. List I.A. No.89-91/2015 along with connected applications on 29.03.2016 at 2.00 p.m. I.A. No.135-137/2015 Issue notice. Mr. Gaurav Agrawal, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. He may file reply to these applications within two weeks. I.A. No.119-121 of 2015 Learned counsel for the Saharas and SEBI shall file their reply to these applications within two weeks. List I.A. No.119-121 of 2015 along with other connected applications on 29.03.2016 at 2.00 p.m.
4 I.A. No.138-140/2015 Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel seeks permission to sell certain items of property including four aircrafts which the group companies owned details whereof are given in para 3 of the applications. Mr. Venugopal, learned counsel for SEBI and Mr.Shekhar Napahade, learned amicus curiae may file their objections to these applications within two weeks. List I.A. No.138-140/2015 along with connected applications on 29.03.2016 at 2.00 p.m. I.A. No.104-106/2016 List applications for appointment of Receiver along with I.A. No.83-85/2015 for final hearing on 29.03.2016 at 2.00 p.m. I.A. No.90-91 of 2014 Heard. For the reasons stated in the applications and the additional affidavit filed by SEBI, we direct that a sum of Rs.41,44,76,410/- shall be reimbursed to SEBI towards the expenditure incurred by SEBI on various items as set out in the additional affidavit upto 28.05.2015. The reimbursement shall be out of the interest amount earned by the deposit made in SEBI Sahara Account. The adjustment shall be without prejudice to Sahara's right to seek refund if any in accordance with law. I.A. Nos.90-91 of 2014 are accordingly disposed of. Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel submits that since the entire record filed by Saharas has been digitized the original documents can be returned to Saharas not only to keep them in safe custody but also to avoid the recurring expenditure which SEBI is
5 incurring towards rent of the storage facility hired by it. Mr. Arvind Datar, learned senior counsel appearing for SEBI submits that he has no objection to the return of the documents provided they are kept in safe custody under double locking system by SEBI & Saharas. Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel agrees to approach SEBI with the requisite details of the storage facility where Saharas would like the record to be shifted for storage purposes. Once SEBI is satisfied with the storage facility it shall be free to transfer the records to any such facility to be retained under double lock of SEBI & Saharas. Transportation/Shifting of the record with the new storage facility shall be by Saharas. In case SEBI is called upon to do so expenditure so incurred on transportation/shifting shall be reimbursed to SEBI out of the interest earned by the deposit made by Saharas. Mr. Arvind Datar submits that SEBI will have no difficulty in providing to Saharas a copy of the additional record at the expense of Saharas. The needful shall be done within six weeks. List the matter again on 29.03.2016 at 2.00 p.m. (Ashok Raj Singh) (Veena Khera) Court Master Court Master
;1ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSI.A. NOS. 90-91/2014, 104-106/2015, 119-121/2015, 144-146/2016,132-134/2015, 135-137/2015, 138-140/2016, 141-143/2016 & 131/2015in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412 & 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9813 & 9833/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.& ORS. Respondent(s)(for appropriate orders and directions and impleadment andintervention and office report)WITHCONMT.PET.(C) No. 260/2013 In C.A.No. 8643/2012(With Office Report)Date : 02/02/2016 These applications were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRIFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Shyam Diwan, Sr. Adv.(For applicant/ Mr. Sunil Fernandes, Adv. intervenor) Mr. Nishith Dhruva, Adv.Ms. Astha Sharma, Adv.Mr. Puneeth K.G., Adv.Mr. Tushar Mehta, ASG(Income Tax Mr. Guru Krishna Kumar, Sr. Adv. Department) Mr. D.L. Chidananda, Adv.Ms. Sadhna Sandhu, Adv.Mrs. Anil Katiyar, Adv.Mr. B.V. Balaramdas, Adv.Mr. Gopal Jain, Adv.(For Divine Mrs. Rakhi Ray, Adv.Infra Solution Mr. S.S. Ray, Adv.Pvt. Ltd.) Mr. Vaibhav Gulia, Adv.Mr. Shekhar Napahade, Adv.Sr. Adv. (ac),Adv.Mr. Vikram Sobti, Adv.Ms. Subhangi Tulsi, Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,For Respondent(s)Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv.Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv.2Mr. Nikhil Jain, Adv.Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv.Ms. Preeti Singh, Adv.Mr. Nijam Pasha, Adv.Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv.Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv.Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv.Mr. Abhinav Tripathi, Adv.Mr. R.S. Yadav, Adv.Mr. Manoj V. George, Adv.Mr. Siju Thomas, Adv.Ms. Shilpa M. George, Adv.Mr. Rohit Adlakha, Adv.Mr. Towseef Ahmad Dar, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kajriwal, Adv.Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv.Mr. Surjit Keshri, Adv.Mr. Parag Tripathi, Sr. Adv.Mr. Ramesh Babu M.R., Adv.Ms. Swati Setia, Adv.Mr. Ramesh Babu, Adv.Ms. Pinky Anand, ASGMr. Karan Seth, Adv.
Mr. Rishabh Jain, Adv.Ms. Saudamini Sharma, Adv.Mr. Sanchit Kumar, Adv.Mr. G.K Kumar, Adv.(Union of India) Mr. Arijit Prasad, Adv.Mr. M.P. Gupta, Adv.Mr. Paras Kuhad, Sr. Adv.Mr. Omkar Geedh, Adv.Mr. Gaurav Agarwal, Adv. Ms. Rakhi Ray, Adv. Mr. Y.P. Dhingra,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RI.A. No.77-79 of 2015Taken on Board.By our order dated 03.08.2015 we had directed Mr. GairiShankar Singh, Director and authorized representative of M/s DivineInfra Solutions Pvt. Ltd. to remain present in this Court on the3next date of hearing. Despite the said direction he is not presenttoday. Though no reply seems to have been filed on behalf ofDivine Infra Solutions Pvt. Ltd., learned counsel for the companysubmits that a reply has already been filed. The Office isdirected to locate and place the same on record. Mr. Gauri ShankarSingh shall remain present in person on the next date of hearing toshow cause why he should not be proceeded against for breach of theundertaking dated 08.01.2015 furnished by him to this Court.Mr. Gairi Shankar Singh shall all the same have the liberty ofmaking the deposit in terms of the undertaking furnished on orbefore next date of hearing.List I.A. No.77-79 of 2015 on 29.03.2016 at 2.00 p.m.I.A. No.89-91/2015Taken on Board.Issue notice to Divine Infra Solutions Pvt. Ltd.Mr. S.S. Ray, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of thesaid respondent. He shall file his objection to the applicationswithin two weeks. List I.A. No.89-91/2015 along with connectedapplications on 29.03.2016 at 2.00 p.m.I.A. No.135-137/2015Issue notice.Mr. Gaurav Agrawal, learned counsel accepts notice on behalfof the respondents. He may file reply to these applications withintwo weeks.I.A. No.119-121 of 2015Learned counsel for the Saharas and SEBI shall file theirreply to these applications within two weeks.List I.A. No.119-121 of 2015 along with other connectedapplications on 29.03.2016 at 2.00 p.m.4I.A. No.138-140/2015Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel seeks permission tosell certain items of property including four aircrafts which thegroup companies owned details whereof are given in para 3 of theapplications.Mr. Venugopal, learned counsel for SEBI and Mr.ShekharNapahade, learned amicus curiae may file their objections to theseapplications within two weeks.List I.A. No.138-140/2015 along with connected applications on29.03.2016 at 2.00 p.m.I.A. No.104-106/2016List applications for appointment of Receiver along with I.A.No.83-85/2015 for final hearing on 29.03.2016 at 2.00 p.m.I.A. No.90-91 of 2014Heard.For the reasons stated in the applications and the additional
affidavit filed by SEBI, we direct that a sum of Rs.41,44,76,410/-shall be reimbursed to SEBI towards the expenditure incurred bySEBI on various items as set out in the additional affidavit upto28.05.2015. The reimbursement shall be out of the interest amountearned by the deposit made in SEBI Sahara Account. The adjustmentshall be without prejudice to Sahara's right to seek refund if anyin accordance with law. I.A. Nos.90-91 of 2014 are accordingly disposed of.Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel submits that since theentire record filed by Saharas has been digitized the originaldocuments can be returned to Saharas not only to keep them in safecustody but also to avoid the recurring expenditure which SEBI is5incurring towards rent of the storage facility hired by it. Mr. Arvind Datar, learned senior counsel appearing for SEBIsubmits that he has no objection to the return of the documentsprovided they are kept in safe custody under double locking systemby SEBI & Saharas. Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel agrees to approachSEBI with the requisite details of the storage facility whereSaharas would like the record to be shifted for storage purposes.Once SEBI is satisfied with the storage facility it shall be freeto transfer the records to any such facility to be retained underdouble lock of SEBI & Saharas. Transportation/Shifting of therecord with the new storage facility shall be by Saharas. In caseSEBI is called upon to do so expenditure so incurred ontransportation/shifting shall be reimbursed to SEBI out of theinterest earned by the deposit made by Saharas. Mr. Arvind Datar submits that SEBI will have no difficulty inproviding to Saharas a copy of the additional record at the expenseof Saharas.The needful shall be done within six weeks.List the matter again on 29.03.2016 at 2.00 p.m. (Ashok Raj Singh) (Veena Khera) Court Master Court Master
REVISED ITEM NO.803 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. NO.119-121 OF 2015 IN CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412-413/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 13/01/2016 These applications were mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI For Petitioner(s) M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Gopal Jain, Adv. (mentioned by) Mr. S.S. Ray, Adv. Ms. Rakhi Ray, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List I.A. No.119-121 of 2015 along with other I.A. Nos.104-106 of 2015 and I.A. No.90-91 of 2014 on 02.02.2016 at 3.30 p.m. (Ashok Raj Singh) (Saroj Saini) Court Master Court Master
REVISED ITEM NO.803 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. NO.119-121 OF 2015 IN CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412-413/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 13/01/2016 These applications were mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI For Petitioner(s) M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Gopal Jain, Adv. (mentioned by) Mr. S.S. Ray, Adv. Ms. Rakhi Ray, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List I.A. No.119-121 of 2015 along with other I.A. Nos.104-106 of 2015 and I.A. No.90-91 of 2014 on 02.02.2016 at 3.30 p.m. (Ashok Raj Singh) (Saroj Saini) Court Master Court MasterSignature Not VerifiedDigitally signed byASHOK RAJ SINGHDate: 2016.02.0112:39:23 ISTReason:
ITEM NO.804 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412-413/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) with C.P.(C) No. 413 of 2012 in C.A. No. 9833 of 2011 and 260 of 2013 in C.A. No. 8643 of 2012 I.A. No. 104-106 of 2015 and I.A. No. 90-91 of 2014 Date : 06/01/2016 This petition was mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. MS. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Niharika, Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON being mentioned the Court made the following O R D E R List I.As No. 104-106 of 2015 and I.A. No. 90-91 of 2014 on 02.02.2016 at 3.30 P.M. (Shashi Sareen) (Saroj Saini) AR-cum-PS Court Master
¨ ITEM NO.804 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412-413/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) with C.P.(C) No. 413 of 2012 in C.A. No. 9833 of 2011 and 260 of 2013 in C.A. No. 8643 of 2012 I.A. No. 104-106 of 2015 and I.A. No. 90-91 of 2014 Date : 06/01/2016 This petition was mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. MS. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Niharika, Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON being mentioned the Court made the following O R D E R List I.As No. 104-106 of 2015 and I.A. No. 90-91 of 2014 on 02.02.2016 at 3.30 P.M. (Shashi Sareen) (Saroj Saini) AR-cum-PS Court MasterSignature Not VerifiedDigitally signed byShashi SareenDate: 2016.01.0610:37:01 ISTReason:
1 ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII/XVIA S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 in C.A. No. 9813/2011 AND CONMT.PET.(C) NO.413/2012 IN C.A. NO.9833/2011 AND CONMT.PET.(C) NO.260/2013 IN C.A. NO.8643/2012 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (With appln.(s) for stay and releasing of persons and appropriate direction and intervention and exemption from filing O.T. and release of petitioner and directions and modification of court's order and impleadment and extension of time and appropriate orders and office report) WITH T.C.(C) No. 87/2014 T.C.(C) No. 86/2014 T.C.(C) No. 84/2014 T.C.(C) No. 85/2014 T.C.(C) No. 83/2014 Date : 28/09/2015 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Shekhar Naphade, Sr. Adv.(A.C.) Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Anuj Sarma, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair, Adv. Ms. Niharika, Adv. For M/s. K. J. John & Co. Mr. Shrinath Agrawal, Adv.
2 Mr. Vishwapal Singh, Adv. Ms. Sujata Kurdukar,Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. Mr. Ajay Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Ankit R. Kothari, Adv. Mr. L. Nageshwara Rao, Sr. Adv. Mr. Satinder Kapur, Adv. Ms. Indra Sawhney, Adv. Mr. Lakshay Sawhney, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mrs. Shally Bhasin,Adv. Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Sjit Keshri, Adv. Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. Mr. Nikhil Jain, Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Nijam Pasha, Adv. Mr. Saleem Inaamdar, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Mr. Abhinav Tripathi, Adv. Mr. R.S. Yadav, Adv. Mr. Kumar Ayush, Adv. Mr. S. Srivastava, Adv. Mr. Subramanium Prasad, Sr. Adv. Mr. Saurabh S., Adv. Mr. Prashant Kumar, Adv. Mr. Joseph Pookkatt, Adv. For M/s A.P. & J. Chambers. Mr. Neeraj Sharma,Adv.
3 Mr. Guru Krishna Kumar, Sr. Adv. Mr. D.L. Chidananda, Adv. Ms.Sadhna Sandhu, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar,Adv. Mr. Arijit Prasad, Adv. Mr. B.V.Balram Das, Adv. Mr. Shyam Divan, Sr.Adv. Mr. S.S. Ray, Adv. Mrs. Rakhi Ray,Adv. Mr. Gopal Jain, Adv. Mr. Amitabh C., Adv. Mr. Vaibhav Gulia, Adv. Ms. Rupali Lal Mathur, Adv. Ms. Chinmayee Chandra, Adv. Mr. Udayaditya Banerjee, Adv. Mr. Ramesh Babu M.R.,Adv. Ms. Swati Setia, Adv. Mr. Paras K., Sr. Adv. Ms. Swati Vijaywargiya, Adv. Mr. Omkarbir, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Agarwal,Adv. Mr. S.K. Singhania,Adv. Dr. Kailash Chand,Adv. Mr. Suryanarayana Singh, Adv. Mrs. Pragati Nekhra,Adv. Mr. Ashish Verma, Adv. Mr. Birendra Kumar Mishra,Adv. Mr. Ajay Choudhary, Adv. Ms. Indira Sawhney, Adv.
4 UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R I.A. Nos. 104-106/2015 SEBI has moved these applications seeking appointment of a receiver and for issue of incidental directions. Sahara's shall file their reply to the applications within four weeks. Rejoinder, if any, shall be filed within two weeks thereafter. I.A. Nos. 125-127/2015 These applications have been moved by Helvetia Group Ltd., applicant, for intervention. Having heard Mr. Rao, learned senior counsel for the applicant at some length, we are of the view that it is neither necessary nor proper for us to allow a third party like the applicant in the present applications to intervene in the present proceedings specially when the presence of the applicant even as an intervener, may not be necessary for an effective and final adjudication of the matter under consideration in the contempt petitions. The prayer made in the applications is accordingly declined and the applications dismissed.
5 I.A. Nos. 116-118/2015 Issue notice. Sahara's to file their reply within four weeks. I.A. Nos. 119-121/2015 Issue notice to Sahara and SEBI as also to amicus curiae to respond to the applications and file their reply within four weeks. I.A. Nos. 122-124/2015 Heard. The facilities extended to the contemnors in terms of our order dated 01.08.2014 shall stand extended by another six weeks. I.A. Nos. 90-93/2015 These applications shall also be listed on the next date of hearing along with other I.As.
6 I.A. Nos. 107-109/2015 Tag these applications along with I.A. Nos.116-118/2015. List the main matter along with I.A. Nos. 104-106/2015, I.A. Nos. 116-118/2015, I.A. Nos. 119-121/2015, I.A. Nos. 122-124/2015, I.A. Nos. 90-93/2015 and I.A. Nos. 107-109/2015 after six weeks. Documents submitted today by Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel, shall be kept in a sealed cover. (VINOD KR.JHA) COURT MASTER (VEENA KHERA) COURT MASTER
p9 1 ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII/XVIA S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 in C.A. No. 9813/2011 AND CONMT.PET.(C) NO.413/2012 IN C.A. NO.9833/2011 AND CONMT.PET.(C) NO.260/2013 IN C.A. NO.8643/2012 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (With appln.(s) for stay and releasing of persons and appropriate direction and intervention and exemption from filing O.T. and release of petitioner and directions and modification of court's order and impleadment and extension of time and appropriate orders and office report) WITH T.C.(C) No. 87/2014 T.C.(C) No. 86/2014 T.C.(C) No. 84/2014 T.C.(C) No. 85/2014 T.C.(C) No. 83/2014 Date : 28/09/2015 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Shekhar Naphade, Sr. Adv.(A.C.) Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv.Signature Not Verified Mr. Anuj Sarma, Adv.Digitally signed byVinod KumarDate: 2015.09.30 Mr. Gaurav Nair, Adv.11:53:19 ISTReason: Ms. Niharika, Adv. For M/s. K. J. John & Co. Mr. Shrinath Agrawal, Adv. 2 Mr. Vishwapal Singh, Adv. Ms. Sujata Kurdukar,Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. Mr. Ajay Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Ankit R. Kothari, Adv. Mr. L. Nageshwara Rao, Sr. Adv. Mr. Satinder Kapur, Adv. Ms. Indra Sawhney, Adv.
Mr. Lakshay Sawhney, Adv.For Respondent(s) Mrs. Shally Bhasin,Adv. Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Sjit Keshri, Adv. Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. Mr. Nikhil Jain, Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Nijam Pasha, Adv. Mr. Saleem Inaamdar, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Mr. Abhinav Tripathi, Adv. Mr. R.S. Yadav, Adv. Mr. Kumar Ayush, Adv. Mr. S. Srivastava, Adv. Mr. Subramanium Prasad, Sr. Adv. Mr. Saurabh S., Adv. Mr. Prashant Kumar, Adv. Mr. Joseph Pookkatt, Adv. For M/s A.P. & J. Chambers. Mr. Neeraj Sharma,Adv. 3Mr. Guru Krishna Kumar, Sr. Adv.Mr. D.L. Chidananda, Adv.Ms.Sadhna Sandhu, Adv.Mrs. Anil Katiyar,Adv.Mr. Arijit Prasad, Adv.Mr. B.V.Balram Das, Adv.Mr. Shyam Divan, Sr.Adv.Mr. S.S. Ray, Adv.Mrs. Rakhi Ray,Adv.Mr. Gopal Jain, Adv.Mr. Amitabh C., Adv.Mr. Vaibhav Gulia, Adv.Ms. Rupali Lal Mathur, Adv.Ms. Chinmayee Chandra, Adv.Mr. Udayaditya Banerjee, Adv.Mr. Ramesh Babu M.R.,Adv.Ms. Swati Setia, Adv.Mr. Paras K., Sr. Adv.Ms. Swati Vijaywargiya, Adv.Mr. Omkarbir, Adv.Mr. Gaurav Agarwal,Adv.Mr. S.K. Singhania,Adv.Dr. Kailash Chand,Adv.Mr. Suryanarayana Singh, Adv.Mrs. Pragati Nekhra,Adv.Mr. Ashish Verma, Adv.
Mr. Birendra Kumar Mishra,Adv.Mr. Ajay Choudhary, Adv.Ms. Indira Sawhney, Adv. 4 UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RI.A. Nos. 104-106/2015 SEBI has moved these applications seekingappointment of a receiver and for issue ofincidental directions. Sahara's shall file theirreply to the applications within four weeks.Rejoinder, if any, shall be filed within two weeksthereafter.I.A. Nos. 125-127/2015 These applications have been moved by HelvetiaGroup Ltd., applicant, for intervention. Having heard Mr. Rao, learned senior counselfor the applicant at some length, we are of the viewthat it is neither necessary nor proper for us toallow a third party like the applicant in thepresent applications to intervene in the presentproceedings specially when the presence of theapplicant even as an intervener, may not benecessary for an effective and final adjudication ofthe matter under consideration in the contemptpetitions. The prayer made in the applications isaccordingly declined and the applications dismissed. 5I.A. Nos. 116-118/2015 Issue notice. Sahara's to file their reply within fourweeks.I.A. Nos. 119-121/2015 Issue notice to Sahara and SEBI as also toamicus curiae to respond to the applications and
file their reply within four weeks.I.A. Nos. 122-124/2015 Heard. The facilities extended to the contemnors interms of our order dated 01.08.2014 shall standextended by another six weeks.I.A. Nos. 90-93/2015 These applications shall also be listed on thenext date of hearing along with other I.As. 6I.A. Nos. 107-109/2015 Tag these applications along with I.A.Nos.116-118/2015. List the main matter along with I.A. Nos.104-106/2015, I.A. Nos. 116-118/2015, I.A. Nos.119-121/2015, I.A. Nos. 122-124/2015, I.A. Nos.90-93/2015 and I.A. Nos. 107-109/2015 after sixweeks. Documents submitted today by Mr. Kapil Sibal,learned senior counsel, shall be kept in a sealedcover. (VINOD KR.JHA) (VEENA KHERA) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER
SECTION XVI-A IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA LISTED ON : 18.09.2015 CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION COURT NO.: 2 ITEM NO: 301 TRANSFERRED CASE (CIVIL) NOS. 83, 84, 85, 86 AND 87 OF 2014 (@ C.P. Nos. 412 & 413 of 2012 in CA Nos. 9813 & 9833 of 2011) SUBRATA ROY SAHARA ETC. ..... Petitioner Versus SECRURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA ETC. .....Respondent OFFICE REPORT In pursuance of Court's Order dated 17 th July, 2013 passed in C.P. Nos. 412 & 413 of 2012 in Civil Appeal Nos. 9813 & 9833 of 2011 respectively, the Securities Appellate Tribunal Mumbai and High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, U.P. have sent the Original Records which have been registered as Transferred Case Nos. 83, 84, 85, 86 & 87 of 2014. Service position of the each matter is mentioned below:- S. No. (I) T.C. No. (II) High Court Particulars (III) Remarks 1 T.C. No. 83 of 2014 @ CP 412-13/2012 in CA Nos. 9813/2011 & 9833/2011 Securities Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai Appeal No. 42/2013 Petitioner : 1 Respondent : 1 Sole Petitioner is represented by Mr. Gautam Awasthi Advocates. Sole Respondent is represented by M/s K. J John & Company, Advocate. Paper Books have been received from the counsel for the Petitioner. Service is complete. 2. T.C. No. 84 of 2014 @ CP 412-13/2012 in CA Nos. 9813/2011 & 9833/2011 Securities Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai Appeal No. 48/2013 Petitioner : 1 Respondent : 1 Sole Petitioner is represented by Mr. Gautam Awasthi Advocate. Sole Respondent is represented by M/s K. J John and Co., Advocates. Paper Books have been received from the counsel for the Petitioner. Service is complete.
S. No. (I) T.C. No. (II) High Court Particulars (III) Remarks 3. T.C. No. 85 of 2014 @ CP 412-13/2012 in CA Nos. 9813/2011 & 9833/2011 Securities Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai Appeal No. 49/2013 Petitioners : 1 Respondent : 1 Sole Petitioner is represented by Mr. Gautam Awasthi Advocate. Sole Respondent is represented by M/S K. J John and Company, Advocates. Paper Books have been received from the counsel for the Petitioner. Service is complete. 4. T.C. No. 86 of 2014 @ CP 412-13/2012 in CA Nos. 9813/2011 & 9833/2011 Securities Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai Appeal No. 50/2013 Petitioner : 3 Respondent : 1 It is submitted that Petitioner Nos. 1 & 2 are represented by Mr. Gautam Awasthi and Petitioner No. 3 is represented by Mrs. Shally Bhashin Maheshwari, Advocates. Sole Respondent is represented by M/s K. J John & Co, Advocates. Paper Books have been received from the counsel for the Petitioner. Service is complete. 5 T.C. No. 87 of 2014 @ CP 412-12/2012 in CA Nos. 9813/2011 & 9833/2011 High Court of Allahabad in W.P. No. 2088/2013. Petitioners : 2 Respondents : 5 Both the Petitioners are represented by Ms Sujata Kurdukar, Advocate. Respondent No. 1 is represented by M/s K. J. John & Co., Advocates. Certificate of Service regarding transmission of the Orginal Record has not been received in respect of Respondent Nos. 2 to 5. Paper Books have received from the Counsel for the Petitioner. Service regarding transmission of Original Record to this Court in respect of Respondent Nos. 2 to 5 is not complete. Cont..3/-
-3- It is submitted that the I.A. Nos 68-69 of 2013 in Contempt Petition Nos. 412-413 of 12 in C.A. Nos. 9813 & 9833 of 2011 were listed before the Hon'ble Court on 3 rd August, 2015 alongwith connected matters, when the Hon'ble Court, inter alia, passed the following order :- “Reply in this petition has already been filed by the contemnors. The SEBI is free to file rejoinder to the reply with in two weeks. List again along with any fresh application for appointment of receiver, if any, filed by SEBI along with Transferred Case (Civil) Nos.83, 84, 85, 86, 87 of 2014 and all other pending applications in Contempt Petition (C) Nos.412 & 413 of 2012 and Contempt Petition (C) No.260 of 2013 in the week commencing from 14 th September, 2015. ” It is submitted that counsel for the parties have not filed any application in the T.C. No.s 83, 84, 85, 86 & 87 of 2014 above-mentioned matters so far. The Transferred Cases above menioned are listed before the Hon'ble Court with this Office Report. Dated this the 16 th day of September, 2015 ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Copy to : Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Advocate M/s K. J. John & Co, Advocates Ms. Sujata Kurdukar , Advocate Mr. Shally Bhasin Maheshwari, Advocate ASSISTANT REGISTRAR kom
ITEM NO.801 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 16/09/2015 This petition was mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH Mr. Shekhar Naphade, Sr. Adv. (A.C.) For Petitioner(s) M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. UPON being mentioned the Court made the following O R D E R Post the matter on 28.09.2015 at 2.00 P.M. (Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master (The matter is coming on 18.09.2015)
Ì ITEM NO.801 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 16/09/2015 This petition was mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH Mr. Shekhar Naphade, Sr. Adv. (A.C.) For Petitioner(s) M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. UPON being mentioned the Court made the following O R D E R Post the matter on 28.09.2015 at 2.00 P.M. (Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master (The matter is coming on 18.09.2015)Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed byShashi SareenDate: 2015.09.1905:45:46 ISTReason:Ì ITEM NO.801 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 16/09/2015 This petition was mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH Mr. Shekhar Naphade, Sr. Adv. (A.C.) For Petitioner(s) M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. UPON being mentioned the Court made the following O R D E R Post the matter on 28.09.2015 at 2.00 P.M. (Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master (The matter is coming on 18.09.2015)Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed byShashi SareenDate: 2015.09.1905:45:46 ISTReason:
ITEM NO.303 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A.Nos. 86-88, 89-91, 92-94, 95-97, 98-100 & 101-103/2015 IN CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 and CONMT.PET.No. 413/2012 IN C.A.No.9833/2011 and CONMT.PET.(C) No. 260/2013 IN C.A. No. 8643/2012 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (with appln. (s) for directions and impleadment and office report) Date : 17/08/2015 These applications were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Shekhar Naphade,Sr.Adv.(A.C.) for SEBI Mr. Pratap Venugopal,Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman,Adv. Mr. Purushottam Kumar Jha,Adv. Mr. Anuj Sharma,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair,Adv. Ms. Niharika,Adv.for M/s. K.J.John & Co. For Respondent(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal,Sr.Adv. No.5 Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. Mr. Nikhil Jain,Adv. Mr. Ayush Chaudhary,Adv. Mr. Nijam Pasha,Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh,Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar,Adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi,Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar,Adv. Mr. Abhinav Tripathi,Adv. Mr. R.S.Yadav,Adv. For CBDT Mr. Arijit Prasad,Adv. Mr. D.L.Chidananda,Adv. Ms. Sadhana Sandhu,Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar,Adv.
-2- For RBI Mr. Ramesh Babu M. R.,Adv. Ms. Swati Sinha,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Agrawal,Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. In IA Nos.92-94& Mr. S.Prasad,Sr.Adv. 95-97: Mr. Saurabh Suman Sinha,Adv. Mr. Joseph Pookkatt,Adv. In IA Nos. 98-100 Mr. Jitender Singh,adv. & 101-103: Mr. Prashant Kumar,adv.for applicant: M/s. AP & J. Chambers. For Divine Infra Mr. Shyam Divan,Sr.Adv. Solutions Pvt.Ltd. Mr. S.S.Ray,Adv. Ms. Rakhi Ray,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R In I.A.Nos. 86-88 We have heard these applications. Facilities extended by this Court's order dated 19.6.2015 shall stand extended till the end of September, 2015. In I.A.Nos. 89-91 Issue notice to the counsel for the respondents including the purchasers of the property referred to in these applications. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents accept notice.
-3- Objections be filed by the non-respondents owners before 18.9.2015. In IA Nos. 98-100 and 101-103 Non-applicants Sahara may file their objections to these applications also. The respondents-Sahara shall file in a sealed cover a copy of the mortgage deed executed by them in favour of the Bank of China and a note as to the arrangements made between Bank of China and Rueben Brothers as also the arrangements, if any, between Rueben Brothers and Sahara on or before the next date of hearing. The proposals said to be under consideration of the respondent-Sahara filed by Mr. Kapil Sibal today in the form of a spiral binding compilation shall be kept in a sealed cover. I.A.Nos. 77-79/2015 Time to file a reply is extended by one more week in favour of Divine Infrasolutions Pvt. Ltd. List all the I.As. on 18.9.2015. (SUMAN WADHWA) AR-cum-PS (VEENA KHERA) COURT MASTER
˜& ITEM NO.303 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A.Nos. 86-88, 89-91, 92-94, 95-97, 98-100 & 101-103/2015 IN CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 and CONMT.PET.No. 413/2012 IN C.A.No.9833/2011 and CONMT.PET.(C) No. 260/2013 IN C.A. No. 8643/2012 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (with appln. (s) for directions and impleadment and office report) Date : 17/08/2015 These applications were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Shekhar Naphade,Sr.Adv.(A.C.) for SEBI Mr. Pratap Venugopal,Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman,Adv. Mr. Purushottam Kumar Jha,Adv. Mr. Anuj Sharma,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair,Adv. Ms. Niharika,Adv.for M/s. K.J.John & Co. For Respondent(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal,Sr.Adv. No.5 Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. Mr. Nikhil Jain,Adv. Mr. Ayush Chaudhary,Adv. Mr. Nijam Pasha,Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh,Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar,Adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi,Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar,Adv.Signature Not Verified Mr. Abhinav Tripathi,Adv.Digitally signed bySuman WadhwaDate: 2015.08.18 Mr. R.S.Yadav,Adv.16:57:39 ISTReason: For CBDT Mr. Arijit Prasad,Adv. Mr. D.L.Chidananda,Adv. Ms. Sadhana Sandhu,Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar,Adv. -2-For RBI Mr. Ramesh Babu M. R.,Adv. Ms. Swati Sinha,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Agrawal,Adv.
Mr. Keshav Mohan,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv.In IA Nos.92-94& Mr. S.Prasad,Sr.Adv.95-97: Mr. Saurabh Suman Sinha,Adv. Mr. Joseph Pookkatt,Adv.In IA Nos. 98-100 Mr. Jitender Singh,adv.& 101-103: Mr. Prashant Kumar,adv.forapplicant: M/s. AP & J. Chambers.For Divine Infra Mr. Shyam Divan,Sr.Adv.Solutions Pvt.Ltd. Mr. S.S.Ray,Adv. Ms. Rakhi Ray,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R In I.A.Nos. 86-88 We have heard these applications. Facilities extended by this Court's order dated 19.6.2015 shall stand extended till the end of September, 2015. In I.A.Nos. 89-91 Issue notice to the counsel for the respondents including the purchasers of the property referred to in these applications. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents accept notice. -3- Objections be filed by the non-respondents ownersbefore 18.9.2015.In IA Nos. 98-100 and 101-103 Non-applicants Sahara may file their objections tothese applications also. The respondents-Sahara shall file in a sealed covera copy of the mortgage deed executed by them in favour ofthe Bank of China and a note as to the arrangements madebetween Bank of China and Rueben Brothers as also thearrangements, if any, between Rueben Brothers and Sahara on
or before the next date of hearing. The proposals said to be under consideration of therespondent-Sahara filed by Mr. Kapil Sibal today in theform of a spiral binding compilation shall be kept in asealed cover.I.A.Nos. 77-79/2015 Time to file a reply is extended by one more weekin favour of Divine Infrasolutions Pvt. Ltd. List all the I.As. on 18.9.2015. (SUMAN WADHWA) (VEENA KHERA) AR-cum-PS COURT MASTER
ITEM NO.803 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.As. No.... of 2015 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (For impleadment/Direction) Date : 14/08/2015 These petitions were mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI For Petitioner(s)/ Mr. Subramonium Prasad, Sr. Adv. Applicant Mr. Saurabh S.Sinha, Adv. Mr. Sunil Singh Parihar, Adv. Mr. Anirudh Singh, Adv. M/s. AP & J Chambers Mr. D.P.Singh, Adv. Mr. Jitendra Singh, Adv. Mr. Sunil Singh Parihar, Adv. Mr. Anirudh Singh, Adv. M/s. AP& J Chambers For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Post these I.As...... of 2015 (for impleadment/direction filed by M/s. AP & J Chambers) on 17.08.2015 at 2.00 P.M. (Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
1 ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. 68-70, 71-73 & 74-76 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 AND CONMT.PET.(C)NO.413/2012 IN C.A.NO.9833/2011. S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.& ORS. Respondent(s) (For Impleadment and directions and exemption from filing O.T. and office report) WITH CONMT.PET.(C) No. 260/2013 In C.A. No. 8643/2012 (With Office Report) Date : 03/08/2015 These applications were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Shekhar Naphade, Sr. Adv.(A.C.) Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv. (for SEBI) Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair, Adv. Ms. Niharika, Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. Mr. Pradeep Kant, Sr. Adv. Mr. Rakesh Chaudhary, Adv. I.A.No.68-70/2015 Ms. Kamini Jaiswal, Adv. Mr. Abhimanue Shrestha, Adv. Ms. Divyanshu Sahay, Adv. Ms. Shumaila Altaf, Adv. Ms. Shilpa Dey, Adv. Mr. Paras Kuhad, Sr. Adv. (For Samridhi Ms. Swati Vijaywagiya, Adv. Developers) Ms. Ekank Mehra, Adv. Mr. Tarun Gupta, Adv.
2 Mr. Guru Krishna Kumar, Sr. Adv. Mr. D.L. Chidananda, Adv. (for CBDT) Mr. Sadhana Sandhu, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Keshar Mohan, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Jain, Adv. For R. No.5 Mr. Ayush Chouhdary, Adv. Mr. Nijam Pasha, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Mr. Abhinav Tripathi, Adv. Mr. R.S. Yadav, Adv. Mr. Aditya Chopra, Adv. Mr. Shyam Divan, Sr. Adv. (for Divine Mr. S.S. Ray, Adv. Infrasolutions Ltd.) Mrs. Rakhi Ray, Adv. Mr. Vaibhav Gulia, Adv. For RBI Mr. Ramesh Babu M.R., Adv. Mr. Swati Setia, Adv. (For Ministry of Mr. G.K. Kumar, Sr. Adv. law) Mr. Arijit Prasad, Adv. Mr. B.V.B. Das, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R By our order dated 13.07.2015, we had directed the applicant- Samridhi Developers and M/s Gorakhpur Real Estate Developers Private Limited to deposit an amount equivalent to 25% of 150 crores in the SEBI Sahara Account excluding the amount already
3 deposited by the applicant. While Samridhi Developers has complied with the said order within the time allowed by this Court, M/s Gorakhpur Real Estate Developers Private Limited has not been able to do so. When the matter came up for hearing today, Mrs. Kamini Jaiswal, learned counsel appearing for the said company presented before us bank drafts for a sum of Rs.25 crores and 51 lakhs and a cheque for a sum of Rs.1 crore drawn in favour of SEBI Sahara Refund account along with a certificate from the bank concerned that the account on which the cheque is drawn has sufficient funds for payment of the cheque amount. Ms. Kamini Jaiswal submits that the intervening delay in deposit of the amount could be delayed and the deposit taken as having been made within the time stipulated by this Court. We see no reason to decline that prayer. We have accordingly handed over the drafts and the cheque mentioned above to Mr. Pratap Venugopal, learned counsel appearing for the SEBI for being credited to SEBI Sahara Account. On the last date of hearing, both the intending purchasers had offered a sum of Rs.150 crores for the property in question. It was at that stage that we had directed deposit of further amount by both of them only to test whether their offers are bona fide. Since both the parties have complied with the said direction as mentioned above we asked Mr.Paras Kuhad, learned counsel appearing for Samridhi Developers whether he was willing to raise his offer beyond Rs.150 crores. Mr. Kuhad, upon instructions, submitted that his clients were not ready to go beyond 150 crores. Mr. Kuhad
4 submitted that if M/s Gorakhpur Real Estate Developers Private Limited raised the offer beyond 150 crores, the property could be directed to be sold to them with a direction to SEBI to refund the amount deposited by Samridhi Developers. Ms. Kamini Jaiswal, learned counsel appearing for M/s Gorakhpur Real Estate Developers Private Limited has on instructions further raised the bid amount by another Rs.2 crores to take it to 152 crores as against 150 crores offered by Samridhi Developers. In that view, therefore, we see no reason to decline the higher offer made by Gorakhpur Real Estate Developers Private Limited not only because the amount offered is higher but also because the said company has shown its seriousness and bona fides by depositing a total amount of Rs.37.51 crores by now out of which Rs.11 crores which has been deposited in this court which shall stand transferred to SEBI Sahara Account. Consequently, the arrangement arrived at between the respondent Saharas and Samridhi Developers shall stand rescinded with a direction to the SEBI to refund the amount deposited by Samridhi Developers in connection with the sale and purchase of property at Gorakhpur latest within a period of one week from today. Needless to say that the memorandum of understanding executed between Samridhi Developers and the Sahara shall stand annulled in view of the subsequent above developments. Ms. Kamini Jaiswal, then submitted that the Saharas must
5 keeping in view the representation made before this Court as also the terms settled with the outgoing purchases execute a memoramdum of understanding with the Gorakhpur Real Estate Developers Private Limited on the same terms and conditions as were settled between Samridhi and Saharas. Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel appearing for the Sahara has no objection to that course of action. He submits that the requisite memorandum of understanding on the very same conditions as were settled with the outgoing purchaser shall be executed within a period of one week from today with M/s Gorakhpur Real Estate Developers Private Limited. Mr. Sibal clarified that joint owners of the property at Gorakhpur or their duly authorised power of attorney shall execute the memorandum of understanding on their behalf in favour of new purchaser. That statement is recorded. Regarding the balance payment due for the property in question we have already mentioned in our order dated 13.07.2015 that the successful bidder shall have to deposit the remainder of the sale price in three equal monthly installments falling due on 31.08.2015, 30.09.2015 and 31.10.2015. Now that the signing of the memorandum of understanding is going to take some time, the first installment earlier scheduled to be due on 31.08.2015 shall have to be shifted to another date. We accordingly direct that the first of the remaining three installments shall be payable on 10.09.2015, the second on 10.10.2015 and the third and last installment which
6 would also represent the balance of the amount shall fall due on 10.11.2015. We also make it clear as we have done in our previous order dated 13.07.2015 that in the event of any default in payment of any one of the three balance installments, the amount already deposited by the purchaser shall stand forfeited and that the purchaser shall not be entitled to claim any extension of time for making such payment. At this stage, Ms. Kamini Jaiswal submits that since this Court has made the deposits preemptory and since the last of the installments falls during festival time, this Court would consider granting time till 30.11.2015 to make the payment of the last installment. We order accordingly. The payment of last installment shall now be paid by 30.11.2015 instead of 10.11.2015 as directed earlier. Mr. Arvind Datar, learned senior counsel appearing for SEBI has filed a statement in terms of previous order of this Court, a copy whereof has been furnished to counsel appearing on the other side. I.A. No.77-79 of 2015 in Contempt Petition No.412 of 2012 in Civil Appeal No.9813 of 2011 Issue notice to M/s Divine Infra Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Company which is said to be in default.
7 Mr. S.S. Ray, counsel appearing on behalf of the said company accepts notice. On his request, two weeks' time is granted for filing reply to this application. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, shall be filed within two weeks thereafter. Mr. Gairi Shankar Singh, Director and authorised representative of the said company shall remain present in person on the next date of hearing. I.A. No.53-55 of 2015 In terms of order in the main matter, these applications shall stand dismissed. I.A. No.68-76 of 2015 I.As. No.68-76 of 2015 are disposed of in terms of our order of even date in the main application. I.A.No.80-82 of 2015 We do not see any reason to entertain the I.A. No.80-82 of 2015 which are accordingly dismissed. I.A. No.68-69 of 2013 Reply in this petition has already been filed by the contemnors. The SEBI is free to file rejoinder to the reply within two weeks.
8 List again along with any fresh application for appointment of receiver, if any, filed by SEBI along with Transferred Case (Civil) Nos.83, 84, 85, 86, 87 of 2014 and all other pending applications in Contempt Petition (C) Nos.412 & 413 of 2012 and Contempt Petition (C) No.260 of 2013 in the week commencing from 14 th September, 2015. Mr. Paras Kuhad, learned senior counsel appearing for the intending purchaser of property situated in Varshwa seeks permission to file a fresh application for extension of time for payment of balance amount supported by relevant documents. He is permitted to do so. Post the application for hearing within three weeks after the application has been filed. (Ashok Raj Singh) (Renu Diwan) Court Master Court Master
j 1 ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. 68-70, 71-73 & 74-76 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 AND CONMT.PET.(C)NO.413/2012 IN C.A.NO.9833/2011. S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.& ORS. Respondent(s) (For Impleadment and directions and exemption from filing O.T. and office report) WITH CONMT.PET.(C) No. 260/2013 In C.A. No. 8643/2012 (With Office Report) Date : 03/08/2015 These applications were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Shekhar Naphade, Sr. Adv.(A.C.) Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv. (for SEBI) Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair, Adv. Ms. Niharika, Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. Mr. Pradeep Kant, Sr. Adv. Mr. Rakesh Chaudhary, Adv. I.A.No.68-70/2015 Ms. Kamini Jaiswal, Adv. Mr. Abhimanue Shrestha, Adv. Ms. Divyanshu Sahay, Adv. Ms. Shumaila Altaf, Adv.Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed by Deepak Ms. Shilpa Dey, Adv.MansukhaniDate: 2015.08.07 13:16:58 ISTReason: Digital Signature Cardof Mr. Deepak Mansukhani is Mr. Paras Kuhad, Sr. Adv.being used by Mr. Ashok RajSingh, Court Master. (For Samridhi Ms. Swati Vijaywagiya, Adv. Developers) Ms. Ekank Mehra, Adv. Mr. Tarun Gupta, Adv. 2
Mr. Guru Krishna Kumar, Sr. Adv. Mr. D.L. Chidananda, Adv.(for CBDT) Mr. Sadhana Sandhu, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar, Adv.For Respondent(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Keshar Mohan, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Jain, Adv.For R. No.5 Mr. Ayush Chouhdary, Adv. Mr. Nijam Pasha, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Mr. Abhinav Tripathi, Adv. Mr. R.S. Yadav, Adv. Mr. Aditya Chopra, Adv. Mr. Shyam Divan, Sr. Adv.(for Divine Mr. S.S. Ray, Adv.Infrasolutions Ltd.) Mrs. Rakhi Ray, Adv. Mr. Vaibhav Gulia, Adv.For RBI Mr. Ramesh Babu M.R., Adv. Mr. Swati Setia, Adv.(For Ministry of Mr. G.K. Kumar, Sr. Adv. law) Mr. Arijit Prasad, Adv. Mr. B.V.B. Das, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R By our order dated 13.07.2015, we had directed the applicant-Samridhi Developers and M/s Gorakhpur Real Estate DevelopersPrivate Limited to deposit an amount equivalent to 25% of 150crores in the SEBI Sahara Account excluding the amount already 3deposited by the applicant. While Samridhi Developers has compliedwith the said order within the time allowed by this Court, M/sGorakhpur Real Estate Developers Private Limited has not been ableto do so. When the matter came up for hearing today, Mrs. KaminiJaiswal, learned counsel appearing for the said company presentedbefore us bank drafts for a sum of Rs.25 crores and 51 lakhs and acheque for a sum of Rs.1 crore drawn in favour of SEBI SaharaRefund account along with a certificate from the bank concernedthat the account on which the cheque is drawn has sufficient funds
for payment of the cheque amount. Ms. Kamini Jaiswal submits thatthe intervening delay in deposit of the amount could be delayed andthe deposit taken as having been made within the time stipulated bythis Court. We see no reason to decline that prayer. We haveaccordingly handed over the drafts and the cheque mentioned aboveto Mr. Pratap Venugopal, learned counsel appearing for the SEBI forbeing credited to SEBI Sahara Account. On the last date of hearing, both the intending purchasers hadoffered a sum of Rs.150 crores for the property in question. Itwas at that stage that we had directed deposit of further amount byboth of them only to test whether their offers are bona fide.Since both the parties have complied with the said direction asmentioned above we asked Mr.Paras Kuhad, learned counsel appearingfor Samridhi Developers whether he was willing to raise his offerbeyond Rs.150 crores. Mr. Kuhad, upon instructions, submitted thathis clients were not ready to go beyond 150 crores. Mr. Kuhad 4submitted that if M/s Gorakhpur Real Estate Developers PrivateLimited raised the offer beyond 150 crores, the property could bedirected to be sold to them with a direction to SEBI to refund theamount deposited by Samridhi Developers. Ms. Kamini Jaiswal, learned counsel appearing forM/s Gorakhpur Real Estate Developers Private Limited has oninstructions further raised the bid amount by another Rs.2 croresto take it to 152 crores as against 150 crores offered by SamridhiDevelopers. In that view, therefore, we see no reason to declinethe higher offer made by Gorakhpur Real Estate Developers PrivateLimited not only because the amount offered is higher but alsobecause the said company has shown its seriousness and bona fidesby depositing a total amount of Rs.37.51 crores by now out of whichRs.11 crores which has been deposited in this court which shallstand transferred to SEBI Sahara Account. Consequently, thearrangement arrived at between the respondent Saharas and Samridhi
Developers shall stand rescinded with a direction to the SEBI torefund the amount deposited by Samridhi Developers in connectionwith the sale and purchase of property at Gorakhpur latest within aperiod of one week from today. Needless to say that the memorandumof understanding executed between Samridhi Developers and theSahara shall stand annulled in view of the subsequent abovedevelopments. Ms. Kamini Jaiswal, then submitted that the Saharas must 5keeping in view the representation made before this Court as alsothe terms settled with the outgoing purchases execute a memoramdumof understanding with the Gorakhpur Real Estate Developers PrivateLimited on the same terms and conditions as were settled betweenSamridhi and Saharas. Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel appearing for theSahara has no objection to that course of action. He submits thatthe requisite memorandum of understanding on the very sameconditions as were settled with the outgoing purchaser shall beexecuted within a period of one week from today with M/s GorakhpurReal Estate Developers Private Limited. Mr. Sibal clarified thatjoint owners of the property at Gorakhpur or their duly authorisedpower of attorney shall execute the memorandum of understanding ontheir behalf in favour of new purchaser. That statement isrecorded. Regarding the balance payment due for the property in questionwe have already mentioned in our order dated 13.07.2015 that thesuccessful bidder shall have to deposit the remainder of the saleprice in three equal monthly installments falling due on31.08.2015, 30.09.2015 and 31.10.2015. Now that the signing of thememorandum of understanding is going to take some time, the firstinstallment earlier scheduled to be due on 31.08.2015 shall have tobe shifted to another date. We accordingly direct that the firstof the remaining three installments shall be payable on 10.09.2015,
the second on 10.10.2015 and the third and last installment which 6would also represent the balance of the amount shall fall due on10.11.2015. We also make it clear as we have done in our previous orderdated 13.07.2015 that in the event of any default in payment of anyone of the three balance installments, the amount already depositedby the purchaser shall stand forfeited and that the purchaser shallnot be entitled to claim any extension of time for making suchpayment. At this stage, Ms. Kamini Jaiswal submits that since thisCourt has made the deposits preemptory and since the last of theinstallments falls during festival time, this Court would considergranting time till 30.11.2015 to make the payment of the lastinstallment. We order accordingly. The payment of lastinstallment shall now be paid by 30.11.2015 instead of 10.11.2015as directed earlier. Mr. Arvind Datar, learned senior counsel appearing for SEBIhas filed a statement in terms of previous order of this Court, acopy whereof has been furnished to counsel appearing on the otherside.I.A. No.77-79 of 2015 in Contempt Petition No.412 of 2012in Civil Appeal No.9813 of 2011 Issue notice to M/s Divine Infra Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Companywhich is said to be in default. 7 Mr. S.S. Ray, counsel appearing on behalf of the said companyaccepts notice. On his request, two weeks' time is granted forfiling reply to this application. Rejoinder affidavit, if any,shall be filed within two weeks thereafter. Mr. Gairi ShankarSingh, Director and authorised representative of the said companyshall remain present in person on the next date of hearing.
I.A. No.53-55 of 2015 In terms of order in the main matter, these applicationsshall stand dismissed.I.A. No.68-76 of 2015 I.As. No.68-76 of 2015 are disposed of in terms of our orderof even date in the main application.I.A.No.80-82 of 2015 We do not see any reason to entertain the I.A. No.80-82 of2015 which are accordingly dismissed.I.A. No.68-69 of 2013 Reply in this petition has already been filed by thecontemnors. The SEBI is free to file rejoinder to the reply withintwo weeks. 8 List again along with any fresh application for appointment ofreceiver, if any, filed by SEBI along with Transferred Case (Civil)Nos.83, 84, 85, 86, 87 of 2014 and all other pending applicationsin Contempt Petition (C) Nos.412 & 413 of 2012 and ContemptPetition (C) No.260 of 2013 in the week commencing from 14 thSeptember, 2015. Mr. Paras Kuhad, learned senior counsel appearing for theintending purchaser of property situated in Varshwa seekspermission to file a fresh application for extension of time forpayment of balance amount supported by relevant documents. He ispermitted to do so. Post the application for hearing within three weeks after theapplication has been filed. (Ashok Raj Singh) (Renu Diwan)
Court Master Court Master
1 TEM NO.301 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. 68-70, 71-73 & 74-76 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 AND CONMT.PET.(C)NO.413/2012 IN C.A.NO.9833/2011 AND CONMT.PET.(C)NO.260/2013 IN C.A.NO.8643/2012 No(s). S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (For impleadment and directions and exemption from filing O.T. and office report) Date : 13/07/2015 These applications were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI For Petitioner(s)/ Mr. Paras Kuhad,Sr. Adv. Applicant(s) Mr. Pradeep Kant, Sr. Adv. Ms. Kamini Jaiswal, Adv. Mr. Rakesh Chaudhary, Adv. Mr. Abhimanue Shrestha, Adv. Mr. Divyanshu Sahay, Adv. Ms. Shumaila Altaf, Adv. Ms. Shilpi Dey, Adv. Mr. Shekhar Naphade,Sr.Adv.(A.C.) Ms. Shubhangi Tuli, Adv. Mr. Vikram Sobti, Adv. Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair, Adv. Ms. Niharika, Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. For CBDT Mr. Guru Krishna Kumar, Sr. Adv. Mr. D.L. Chidananda, Adv.
2 Ms. Sadhana Sandhu, Adv. Ms. Anil Katiyar, Adv. For RBI Mr. Ramesh Babu M.R.,Adv. Ms. Swati Setia, Adv. For M/s. Divine Infra. Pvt. Ltd. Mr. Shyam Divan, Sr. Adv. Mr. S.S. Ray, Adv. Ms. Rakhi Ray, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. Mr. Sujit Koshri, Adv. Mr. Gautam Awashthi, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Ms. Kamini Jaiswal, learned counsel has filed I.As No. 68-70 of 2015, inter alia, pointing out that an extent of 45.71 acre of land situated at Gorakhpur is being alienated by the Sahara Group of Companies in favour of Samridhi Builders for a total consideration of Rs.64,00,00,000/- (Rupees Sixty Four Crores only). The applicant alleges that the actual market value of the property even according to the prevailing Circle Rates works out to over Rs.194,00,00,000/- (Rupees One Hundred Ninety Four Crores only), excluding stamp duty and taxes etc. The application further alleges that the applicant has made sufficient inquiry and after being satisfied about the prevailing market value of the property, is ready and willing to purchase the property on the very same terms and conditions as have been negotiated between the Saharas and
3 Samridhi for a total price of Rs.110,00,00,000/- (Rupees One Hundred Ten Crores only). The application asserts that to prove its bonafides the applicant is ready and willing to deposit 10% of the above amount as soon as this Court issues a direction to that effect. The applicant has on that premise prayed for addition as a co-respondent in these proceedings and for appropriate directions. When these applications first came up for hearing before us on 7.7.2015, we directed the applicant to deposit a sum of Rs.11,00,00,000/- (Rupees Eleven Crores only) in this Court by way of a bank draft drawn in favour of the Registrar of this Court to prove its bonafides. By the same order we directed Mr. Chandiok, learned senior counsel appearing for Samridhi to file a certificate from the Bank concerned to the effect that the cheque offered by Samridhi for a sum of Rs.55,56,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty Five Crores Fifty Six Lakhs only) drawn in favour of SEBI was good for payment. Samridhi had in the Court offered to pay up the entire sale consideration by a bank draft of Rs.12.80 crores and a cheque for the balance of Rs.55.56 crores. Ms. Jaiswal today informs us that she has pursuant to the above direction of this Court deposited a sum of Rs.11,00,00,000/- (Rupees Eleven Crores only) with the Registrar of this Court by way of a bank draft. Learned counsel appearing for Samridhi also handed over a draft for a sum of Rs.12,80,00,000/- (Rupees Twelve Crores Eight Lakhs only) drawn in favour of SEBI Sahara Account to Mr. Pratap
4 Venugopal, learned counsel appearing for SEBI. Our attention was also drawn to a certificate issued by the HDFC Bank to the effect that the cheque for Rs.55,56,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty Five Crores only) drawn in the name of SEBI Sahara Account is good for payment. At the hearing Mr. Kuhad, learned senior counsel appearing for Samridhi was asked by us whether Samridhi was willing to match the offer made by the applicant. In response he stated on instructions from Mr. Tanmay Modi, partner of Samridhi, also present in person that Samridhi was ready to do so by revising its offer to Rs.110 crores. Counsel for the parties thereafter revised the offers of their clients upwards to eventually reach a figure of Rs.150 crores which was amount both the intending purchasers offered to pay. It was at this stage that we considered it proper to put the parties to terms before they made any further offer. It was made clear to them that before they could proceed any further they ought to deposit 25% of the amount of Rs.150 crores offered by them to show their bonafides and also agree to pay the balance 75% in 3 monthly instalments ending 30 th October, 2015. Even this was acceptable to the parties. Ms. Jaiswal submitted that the applicant was ready and willing to deposit a further amount of Rs. 26.50 crores by 31 st of July, 2015 which would constitute 25% of the amount of Rs. 150 crores offer by her client for the property in question. Mr. Kuhad, learned senior counsel for Samridhi, was not far behind in making a similar offer. In fact, he offered to
5 deposit an amount higher than 25% also to show that he was not only keen to purchase the property but had the requisite resources to do so. Be that as it may, the proceedings heretofore only show that the two intending purchasers are very keen to purchase the property which appears to be fairly valuable. It is also evident that they have not yet said the last word as regards the amount they are ready to pay. The offer to deposit 25% of Rs.150 crores is only meant to show their bonafides so that this Court takes the process further when the matter comes up again on the next date of hearing. Developments that have taken place till now only show that Rs.150 crores offered by the two purchasers is only the threshold or reserve price. Both of them are ready to revise the said figure upward but before we allow them to do so, we would like them to deposit 25% of Rs.150 crores as a condition precedent for further participation in competitive bidding. We accordingly, direct that the applicants as also Samridhi represented by Mr. Kuhad shall deposit 25% of the amount of Rs.150 crores in SEBI Sahara Account inclusive of the amount already deposited by them. Since the applicant has deposited a sum of Rs.11 crores in this Court, we direct the applicant to deposit the balance amount in the SEBI Sahara Account. We make it clear that if the balance of the amount is not deposited as directed above by 31 st of July, 2015, the amount already received towards the property from the defaulting party concerned shall be forfeited. We may also
6 mention here that the parties are agreeable to these conditions. We also deem it proper to indicate that any further proceedings in relation to the property shall be, subject also to the condition that in case after the deposit of 25% of the amount of Rs.150 crores currently offered any one of the purchasing parties fails to make good the offer by depositing the balance amount in three monthly installments of 25% each, the amount representing 25% of the offer shall stand forfeited. Dr. Dhawan, leaned senior counsel appearing for Sahara pointed out that certain cheques which SEBI has in its possession in connection with sale of certain other properties have not been encashed. Mr. Venugopal, learned counsel for SEBI on the other hand submits that the purchasers had filed an application seeking extension of time and also agreed to furnish an undertaking which process has taken sometime but there has been no undue delay in the encashment of the cheques. Mr. Arvind Datar, learned senior counsel, may furnish a statement of SEBI Sahara Account and investments made to counsel for Sahara’s by the next date of hearing. List the matter on 3 rd August, 2015 at 2.00 p.m. (Ashwani Kumar) (Veena Khera) Court Master Court Master
êX 1 TEM NO.301 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. 68-70, 71-73 & 74-76 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 AND CONMT.PET.(C)NO.413/2012 IN C.A.NO.9833/2011 AND CONMT.PET.(C)NO.260/2013 IN C.A.NO.8643/2012 No(s). S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (For impleadment and directions and exemption from filing O.T. and office report) Date : 13/07/2015 These applications were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI For Petitioner(s)/ Mr. Paras Kuhad,Sr. Adv. Applicant(s) Mr. Pradeep Kant, Sr. Adv. Ms. Kamini Jaiswal, Adv. Mr. Rakesh Chaudhary, Adv. Mr. Abhimanue Shrestha, Adv. Mr. Divyanshu Sahay, Adv. Ms. Shumaila Altaf, Adv. Ms. Shilpi Dey, Adv. Mr. Shekhar Naphade,Sr.Adv.(A.C.) Ms. Shubhangi Tuli, Adv. Mr. Vikram Sobti, Adv. Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv.Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed by Mahabir Mr. Gaurav Nair, Adv.SinghDate: 2015.07.14 16:48:11 ISTReason: Matter is beinguploaded by Ashwani KUmar, Ms. Niharika, Adv.CM by using the Card of Mr.Mahabir Singh, Court Master M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. For CBDT Mr. Guru Krishna Kumar, Sr. Adv. Mr. D.L. Chidananda, Adv. 2 Ms. Sadhana Sandhu, Adv. Ms. Anil Katiyar, Adv.For RBI Mr. Ramesh Babu M.R.,Adv.
Ms. Swati Setia, Adv.For M/s. DivineInfra. Pvt. Ltd. Mr. Shyam Divan, Sr. Adv. Mr. S.S. Ray, Adv. Ms. Rakhi Ray, Adv.For Respondent(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. Mr. Sujit Koshri, Adv. Mr. Gautam Awashthi, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Ms. Kamini Jaiswal, learned counsel has filed I.As No.68-70 of 2015, inter alia, pointing out that an extent of45.71 acre of land situated at Gorakhpur is being alienated bythe Sahara Group of Companies in favour of Samridhi Buildersfor a total consideration of Rs.64,00,00,000/- (Rupees SixtyFour Crores only). The applicant alleges that the actualmarket value of the property even according to the prevailingCircle Rates works out to over Rs.194,00,00,000/- (Rupees OneHundred Ninety Four Crores only), excluding stamp duty andtaxes etc. The application further alleges that the applicanthas made sufficient inquiry and after being satisfied aboutthe prevailing market value of the property, is ready andwilling to purchase the property on the very same terms andconditions as have been negotiated between the Saharas and 3Samridhi for a total price of Rs.110,00,00,000/- (Rupees OneHundred Ten Crores only). The application asserts that toprove its bonafides the applicant is ready and willing todeposit 10% of the above amount as soon as this Court issues adirection to that effect. The applicant has on that premiseprayed for addition as a co-respondent in these proceedingsand for appropriate directions. When these applications first came up for hearing beforeus on 7.7.2015, we directed the applicant to deposit a sum ofRs.11,00,00,000/- (Rupees Eleven Crores only) in this Court by
way of a bank draft drawn in favour of the Registrar of thisCourt to prove its bonafides. By the same order we directedMr. Chandiok, learned senior counsel appearing for Samridhi tofile a certificate from the Bank concerned to the effect thatthe cheque offered by Samridhi for a sum of Rs.55,56,00,000/-(Rupees Fifty Five Crores Fifty Six Lakhs only) drawn infavour of SEBI was good for payment. Samridhi had in the Courtoffered to pay up the entire sale consideration by a bankdraft of Rs.12.80 crores and a cheque for the balance ofRs.55.56 crores. Ms. Jaiswal today informs us that she has pursuant to theabove direction of this Court deposited a sum ofRs.11,00,00,000/- (Rupees Eleven Crores only) with theRegistrar of this Court by way of a bank draft. Learnedcounsel appearing for Samridhi also handed over a draft for asum of Rs.12,80,00,000/- (Rupees Twelve Crores Eight Lakhsonly) drawn in favour of SEBI Sahara Account to Mr. Pratap 4Venugopal, learned counsel appearing for SEBI. Our attentionwas also drawn to a certificate issued by the HDFC Bank to theeffect that the cheque for Rs.55,56,00,000/- (Rupees FiftyFive Crores only) drawn in the name of SEBI Sahara Account isgood for payment. At the hearing Mr. Kuhad, learned senior counselappearing for Samridhi was asked by us whether Samridhi waswilling to match the offer made by the applicant. In responsehe stated on instructions from Mr. Tanmay Modi, partner ofSamridhi, also present in person that Samridhi was ready to doso by revising its offer to Rs.110 crores. Counsel for theparties thereafter revised the offers of their clients upwardsto eventually reach a figure of Rs.150 crores which was amountboth the intending purchasers offered to pay. It was at thisstage that we considered it proper to put the parties to termsbefore they made any further offer. It was made clear to themthat before they could proceed any further they ought to
deposit 25% of the amount of Rs.150 crores offered by them toshow their bonafides and also agree to pay the balance 75% in3 monthly instalments ending 30th October, 2015. Even this wasacceptable to the parties. Ms. Jaiswal submitted that theapplicant was ready and willing to deposit a further amount ofRs. 26.50 crores by 31st of July, 2015 which would constitute25% of the amount of Rs. 150 crores offer by her client forthe property in question. Mr. Kuhad, learned senior counsel for Samridhi, was notfar behind in making a similar offer. In fact, he offered to 5deposit an amount higher than 25% also to show that he was notonly keen to purchase the property but had the requisiteresources to do so. Be that as it may, the proceedings heretofore only showthat the two intending purchasers are very keen to purchasethe property which appears to be fairly valuable. It is alsoevident that they have not yet said the last word as regardsthe amount they are ready to pay. The offer to deposit 25% ofRs.150 crores is only meant to show their bonafides so thatthis Court takes the process further when the matter comes upagain on the next date of hearing. Developments that havetaken place till now only show that Rs.150 crores offered bythe two purchasers is only the threshold or reserve price.Both of them are ready to revise the said figure upward butbefore we allow them to do so, we would like them to deposit25% of Rs.150 crores as a condition precedent for furtherparticipation in competitive bidding. We accordingly, direct that the applicants as alsoSamridhi represented by Mr. Kuhad shall deposit 25% of theamount of Rs.150 crores in SEBI Sahara Account inclusive ofthe amount already deposited by them. Since the applicant hasdeposited a sum of Rs.11 crores in this Court, we direct theapplicant to deposit the balance amount in the SEBI SaharaAccount. We make it clear that if the balance of the amount
is not deposited as directed above by 31st of July, 2015, theamount already received towards the property from thedefaulting party concerned shall be forfeited. We may also 6mention here that the parties are agreeable to theseconditions. We also deem it proper to indicate that any furtherproceedings in relation to the property shall be, subject alsoto the condition that in case after the deposit of 25% of theamount of Rs.150 crores currently offered any one of thepurchasing parties fails to make good the offer by depositingthe balance amount in three monthly installments of 25% each,the amount representing 25% of the offer shall standforfeited. Dr. Dhawan, leaned senior counsel appearing for Saharapointed out that certain cheques which SEBI has in itspossession in connection with sale of certain other propertieshave not been encashed. Mr. Venugopal, learned counsel for SEBI on the other handsubmits that the purchasers had filed an application seekingextension of time and also agreed to furnish an undertakingwhich process has taken sometime but there has been no unduedelay in the encashment of the cheques. Mr. Arvind Datar,learned senior counsel, may furnish a statement of SEBI SaharaAccount and investments made to counsel for Sahara's by thenext date of hearing. List the matter on 3rd August, 2015 at 2.00 p.m.(Ashwani Kumar) (Veena Khera)Court Master Court Master
1 ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. Nos. 68-70, 71-73 and 74-76 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 and Contempt Petition © No. 413 of 2012 in C.A. No. 9833 of 2011 and Contempt Petition © No. 260 of 2013 in C.A. No. 8643 of 2012 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (for impleadment and directions and exem. From filing O.T. and office report) Date : 07/07/2015 These applications were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Shekhar Naphade, Sr. Adv. Ms. Shubhangi Tuli, Adv. MR. Vikram Sobti, Adv. Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, adv. Mr. Purushotam Jha, adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair, Adv. Ms. Niharika, Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. For Applicant Mr. Pardeep Kant, Sr. Adv. MS. Kamini Jaiswal, Adv. Mr. Rakesh Chaudhary, Adv. Mr. Abhimanue Shrestha, adv. Mr. Divyanshu Sahay, Adv. MS. Shilp Dey, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. Mr. Nikhil Jain, adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv.
2 Mr. Nijam Pasha, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv. Mr. R.S.Yadav, Adv. Applicant-IT Deptt Mr. S.Guru Krishna Kumar, Sr. Adv. Mr. D.L.Chidananda, Adv. Ms. Sadhna Sandhu, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar,Adv. RBI Mr. Ramesh Babu M. R.,Adv. MS.Swati Setia, Adv. Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R I.A. Nos.68-70, 71-73 and 74-76 of 2015 : Learned counsel for the non-applicants given two day's time to file their response to this application. Mr. Pardeep Kant, learned senior counsel for the applicant may take instructions whether the applicants are ready and willing to deposit a sum of Rs. 64,00,00,000/- (Rupees Sixty Four crores only) as the first instalment and the balance offered by him either in one or more instalments over a period of time. Mr. A.S.Chandiok, learned senior counsel who appears for the proposed buyer of the property situate at Gorakhpur has shown to us a Demand draft for Rs. 12,80,00,000/- (Rupees Twelve Crores and Eighty Lakhs only) and a cheque for a sum of Rs. 50,56,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty Crores and Fifty six lakhs only) drawn in favour of the SEBI. While there is no doubt that the demand draft shall be payable at par, the availability of funds in the account of drawer
3 insofar as the cheque is concerned needs to be verified. Mr. Chandiok may, therefore file a certificate from the Bank concerned stating that the cheque in question is good for payment as that the drawer has the requisite funds in his account. Mr. Chandiok may also file reply to these application. Mr. Pardeep Kant on instructions submits that in order to show their bonafides the applicant is ready to deposit a sum of Rs. 11,00,00,000/- (Rupees Eleven Crores only) in this Court in terms of a bank draft drawn in the name of Registrar of this Court. He is permitted to do so. Post on 13.07.2015 at 2.00 P.M. (Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) Court Master Court Master
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION I.A. NOS. 59 – 61 OF 2015 AND I.A. NOS. 62 – 64 OF 2015 IN CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NOS. 412 AND 413 OF 2012 IN CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 9813 AND 9833 OF 2011 AND CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 260 OF 2013 IN CIVIL APPEAL NO. 8643 OF 2012 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA (SEBI) & ANR. .....APPLICANT(S) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN. LTD. & ORS. .....RESPONDENT(S) J U D G M E N T A.K. SIKRI, J. Before we advert to the reliefs claimed in these applications and announce the outcome thereof, we would like to recapitulate, very briefly, the genesis for moving these applications as we feel that such a recount of the previous events would make it easy to IA Nos. 59-61 and 62-64 of 2015 Page 1 of 32
2 understand the circumstances under which these applications have been filed. It would also provide us the course of action that is to be taken on the prayers made in these applications. 2) The main proceedings with which we are concerned are the contempt petitions bearing Nos. 412 of 2012 and 413 of 2012 in Civil Appeal Nos. 9813 of 2011 and 9833 of 2011 as well as Contempt Petition No. 260 of 2013 in Civil Appeal No. 8643 of 2012. These contempt petitions filed by the Securities and Exchange Board of India (for short, 'SEBI') have the origin in the judgments that were pronounced in the civil appeals, numbers whereof are mentioned above. It so happened that Sahara India Real Estate Corporation Limited (SIRECL) and Sahara Housing Investment Corporation Limited (SHICL) (hereinafter referred to as the 'Saharas') invited and claimed to have collected deposits from general public who, allegedly, included cobblers, labourers, artisans, peasants etc. This invitation for deposit was in the form of 'Optional Fully Convertible Debentures' (OFCD). SEBI found that offering of such OFCD was not legally permissible and passed orders directing Saharas not to offer their equity shares/ OFCDs or any other securities to the public or invite subscription in any manner whatsoever either directly or indirectly. The High IA Nos. 59-61 and 62-64 of 2015 Page 2 of 32
3 Court of Bombay dismissed their petitions and directed Sahara Companies, in particular the promoter Mr. Subrata Roy Sahara, and Directors Ms. Vandana Bhargava, Mr. Ravi Shankar Dubey and Mr. Ashok Roy Choudhary of Saharas to jointly and severely refund the amount collected by Saharas in terms of the aforesaid issue along with interest @ 15% per annum. It is pertinent to mention that on the basis of these directions of the High Court, SEBI ordered that refund of the amount shall be made only through demand drafts or pay orders. Certain other directions were also issued. Aggrieved by these orders of SEBI, Saharas approached Securities Appellate Tribunal (for short, 'SAT'). SAT also declined to interfere with the view taken by SEBI and directed Saharas to refund the amount collected from the investors within a period of six weeks. Against these orders of SAT, Civil Appeal Nos. 9813 of 2011 and 9833 of 2011 were preferred by Saharas in this Court, which were finally disposed of by order dated 31.08.2012. While substantially maintaining the orders of SEBI and SAT, a modification was made in those orders with a direction to Saharas to deposit the amount collected by them along with interest @ 15% per annum with SEBI within a period of three months. The amount when deposited was directed IA Nos. 59-61 and 62-64 of 2015 Page 3 of 32
4 to be invested in a nationalised bank to earn interest. Saharas were also directed to furnish details with supporting documents to establish whether they had refunded any amount to the investors who had subscribed through the Red Herring Prospectus (RHP) in question. SEBI was then to examine the correctness of the details so furnished. Failure to prove the refund of the amount by Saharas had to give rise to an inference that Saharas had not refunded the amount to the real and genuine subscribers as directed by SEBI. 3) Aforesaid directions were admittedly not complied with. Instead, another appeal, being Appeal No. 221 of 2012, was preferred by Saharas before SAT which was dismissed as premature. Against that order, Civil Appeal No. 8643 of 2012 was filed in this Court which was decided on 05-12-2012. The Saharas had produced before the Court, demand drafts for a total sum of ₹ 5120 crores. This Court directed them to handover the same to SEBI. Further direction was given to deposit the balance amount of 17,400₹ crores together with interest @ 15% per annum with SEBI in two installments. First installment of 10,000 crores was to be₹ deposited with SEBI by first week of January, 2013 and balance amount, along with interest, was to be deposited by first week of IA Nos. 59-61 and 62-64 of 2015 Page 4 of 32
5 February, 2013. However, the balance amount or the interest payable, as per the installments, was not deposited though it was to be deposited by January/February, 2013. It resulted in filing of the contempt petitions, which are the main proceedings at hand. In these contempt petitions various opportunities were given to the contemnors to purge the contempt by depositing the amount, as directed. The record shows that at various stages the contemnors gave the proposals for compliance with the directions which were explored from time to time, but eventually all these proposals were found to be unsatisfactory, yielding no tangible results. This was perceived as stubborn attitude of the contemnors with sole intent to drag on the matter endlessly without complying with the orders. This attitude of the contemnors forced this Court to issue non-bailable warrants against Mr. Subrata Roy Sahara for his production and directing personal presence of the other three Directors in the Court on the date fixed. On 04.03.2014, when the matter was listed, and during the hearing as it transpired that no acceptable proposal was forthcoming to comply with the directions, the Court was left with no option except to commit the three out of four contemnors to judicial custody. We would like to mention that by that time, IA Nos. 59-61 and 62-64 of 2015 Page 5 of 32
6 after including the interest which had accumulated, a sum of 33,000 crores had to be deposited. ₹ 4) The matter came up for hearing on 26.03.2014 again and the three contemnors committed to judicial custody prayed for grant of bail on that day. The Court passed conditional order of bail on that day. The condition was that the contemnors deposit 10,000₹ crores – ₹ 5000 crores in cash and balance of ₹ 5000 crores in the form of bank guarantee of a nationalised bank, to be furnished in favour of SEBI. It was specifically directed that upon compliance with these conditions the contemnors would be released from the custody. 5) Till date there is no full compliance of the aforesaid condition for grant of interim bail, with the result the three contemnors are still in judicial custody and 15 months have passed thereby. 6) We would like to point out at this stage that by orders dated 21.11.2013 passed by this Court the assets of Sahara Group of Companies were frozen, to ensure that the contemnors do not fritter away these assets without complying with the directions of this Court passed in the Civil Appeals. However, on the request made by Sahara Group for lifting the embargo on certain IA Nos. 59-61 and 62-64 of 2015 Page 6 of 32
7 properties in order to enable the Saharas to sell those properties so that the interim bail conditions are fulfilled, on 04.06.2014, this Court permitted various Sahara Group Companies to deal with/sell some of their assets, but only for the purpose of complying with the order dated 26.03.2014 with further condition that whatever amount is realized by the sale of the said assets, same shall be deposited into the SEBI – Sahara Refund Account and for providing the requisite bank guarantee in favour of SEBI in the sum of ₹ 5000 crores, as per the directions. Though this liberty was granted to Saharas one year ago and some other directions were given from time to time providing various facilities to the three contemnors in judicial custody felicitating contacts and dialogue/interaction with the prospective buyers for clinching of deals, the contemnors have been able to achieve only a partial success. They have mooted various proposals for the sale of these properties. However, major proposals run into rough weather, hitting one or the other kind of road block and had to be terminated midday. We would like to point out that the embargo which was lifted in respect of certain properties, the value thereof as per the books of accounts is in several thousand crores and had the Sahara group succeeded in selling even few of these IA Nos. 59-61 and 62-64 of 2015 Page 7 of 32
8 properties, bail conditions would have been met long ago. Thus, insofar as this Court is concerned it gave all necessary stimulus to enable the applicants to sell the assets, that too at reasonable market price. If, the contemnors have still not been able to achieve the required target, it is either because of the reason that the efforts made by the contemnors as well as other officers of Sahara group in raising money from the sale/encumbrance of these properties were not adequate or it was their ill-luck or it is the market conditions which have to be blamed. Fact remains that by order dated 26.03.2014, this Court had granted bail, albeit with certain conditions. However, it is the contemnors who have not been able to fulfil those conditions for one reason or the other. 7) During this period, certain properties have been sold and the amount realised therefrom stands deposited in the SEBI – Sahara Refund Account. Things have come to a stage where, according to the applicants, they are at the verge of fulfiling the conditions imposed by the orders dated 26.03.2014. It is mentioned that they have certain buyers for some of the properties and the sale proceeds therefrom would meet the deficit. It is also stated that the contemnors have been able to negotiate with a nationalised bank, through two of its Sahara group companies and the said IA Nos. 59-61 and 62-64 of 2015 Page 8 of 32
9 bank has agreed to furnish the required bank guarantee. The format of the bank guarantee is also produced at the time of hearing for the approval of the Court, so that the guarantee is given in the said format, if approved. 8) Assets of various companies of Sahara group have been frozen. According to the applicants, by reason of the said freeze the financial and liquidity position of various Sahara group companies has been adversely affected and it has also resulted into mounting liabilities in the form of statutory liabilities, unpaid salary and wages, outstanding and overdue amounts payable to banks, etc. Because of this reason, IA Nos. 59-61 of 2015 are filed praying for the following reliefs: “ (i) allow the Sahara Group Companies to meet their respective statutory and other liabilities as enumerated in this application under such terms and condition as this Court may deem proper along with the compliance of the order dated 26.03.2014 passed by this Hon'ble Court; (ii) permit the Sahara Group Companies to utilize the balance, if any, of the proceeds obtained from the sale/encumbrance of assets which has been specifically permitted by this Hon'ble Court that remains after complying with the order dated 26.03.2014 passed by this Hon'ble Court for the purpose of meeting the liabilities enumerated in this application; and (iii) For such further and other orders and directions as may appear just, necessary and appropriate to IA Nos. 59-61 and 62-64 of 2015 Page 9 of 32
10 this Hon'ble Court, in the circumstances of the case.” 9) Insofar as permission to sell certain properties of Sahara group is concerned, it was subject to certain conditions as indicated above and one of the conditions was that sale must not be for a price lower than 5% of the estimated value for such a property. The applicants state that in respect of one such property at Gorakhpur, Uttar Pradesh, they have been able to find a purchaser who is ready to step into the shoes of the applicants for development/ maintenance of the said property. MOU with the said party has already been entered into, which is placed on record. It is pointed out, however, that the price being offered is ₹ 64 crores. The price offered is lower than 5% of the estimated value. However, according to the applicants, due to the depressed real estate market, the present estimated market value of the said property is ₹ 53.70 crores, as per the valuation report received. This value is calculated on the basis of circle rate of the project land. On that basis, IA Nos. 62-64 of 2015 are filed with the following prayers: “ (i) Allow the applicants to enter into the Definitive Agreement for the property situated at Gorakhpur; and (ii) pass such further or other orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and IA Nos. 59-61 and 62-64 of 2015 Page 10 of 32
11 circumstances of the present case.” 10) Insofar as the aforesaid prayer (i) in IA Nos. 62-64 of 2015 is concerned, having regard to the reasons mentioned in paras 4 and 5 of the application, which are stated in brief above, and the fact that the MOU is entered for an area of undeveloped land of 45.71 acres out of the total land area of 146 acres, coupled with the fact that there is slump in the real estate market, we allow the applicants to enter into Definitive Agreement, making it clear that the entire amount from the aforesaid deal shall be deposited in SEBI-Sahara Refund Account after adjusting transaction cost and taxes. 11) Insofar as prayers (i) and (ii) contained in IA Nos. 59-61 of 2015 are concerned, we are of the opinion that the stage for making such prayers has not ripened as yet. The Sahara group companies want to meet their statutory and other liabilities from the surplus that would be available after complying with order dated 26.03.2014. As soon as there is a compliance with the said order, this Court shall consider at that stage the availability of the surplus funds along with other factors and then pass appropriate orders on these applications. It is necessary to mention that even IA Nos. 59-61 and 62-64 of 2015 Page 11 of 32
12 after order dated 26.03.2014 is complied with, there is a huge deficit in the form of balance amount that would still be required to be deposited by the applicants/contemnors in order to comply with the directions contained in the orders dated 31.08.2012 and 05.12.2012 passed by this Court in the civil appeals. Therefore, orders on the prayers made in IA Nos. 59-61 of 2015 are deferred for the time being. 12) Coming to the format of the guarantee given by the applicants, on which the applicants want seal of approval from this Court in order to enable them to submit the requisite bank guarantee, we would like to reproduce the same, which reads as follows: “ GUARANTEE We _____________ Bank, a scheduled Bank within the meaning of the Banking Regulation Act, and having our office at _________ do hereby grant and issue this unconditional and irrevocable guarantee of Rs.5000 crores (rupees five thousand corres) in favour of Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) at the request made by Amby Valley (Mauritius) Ltd. on behalf of Sahara India Real Estate Corporation Ltd. and Sahara Housing Investment Corporation Ltd., in compliance with the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India dated 26 th March 2014. We hereby guarantee that on the demand in writing made by SEBI, we shall, without demur, pay the amount demanded upto the maximum amount of Rupees Five Thousand Crores. IA Nos. 59-61 and 62-64 of 2015 Page 12 of 32
13 This guarantee shall remain in force initially for a period of six months and shall be extended for further periods of six months at the time, until SEBI otherwise directs pursuant to the order of Hon'ble Supreme Court.” 13) SEBI has given its nod to the aforesaid format. Likewise, Mr. Shekhar Naphade, learned amicus appointed by this Court, has made a statement that the guarantee to be furnished in the aforesaid format may be accepted. At the same time, Mr. Arvind Datar, learned senior counsel appearing for SEBI, as well as Mr. Naphade were very emphatic in pointing out that this Court should indicate in its order as to what should be the trigger point for encashing the bank guarantee. In other words, it was their submission that insofar as balance amount payable by the applicants/contemnors is concerned, this Court may give some specified time to them for this purpose and on the contemnors/applicants failure to deposit the balance amount, with accrued interest with SEBI, SEBI should be allowed to encash the bank guarantee in question. 14) M/s. Kapil Sibal, Rajeev Dhawan and S. Ganesh, learned senior counsel appearing for the applicants, on the other hand, submitted that it is not necessary to go into this aspect at this IA Nos. 59-61 and 62-64 of 2015 Page 13 of 32
14 stage. They pointed out that last para of the bank guarantee categorically mentions that the guarantee is to remain in force 'until SEBI otherwise directs, pursuant to the orders of the Hon'ble Court' and, thus, this Court can direct at any stage as at what point of time the bank guarantee is to be encashed. Their argument was that the applicants have refunded almost ₹ 16,000 crores to the investors and voluminous record of documents in support thereof has already been handed over to SEBI. It is for the SEBI to verify the same and inform as to what would be the balance amount payable after adjustment of the amounts already paid to the investors and to the extent it is found to be genuine, the same be refunded. They submitted that it is SEBI which is not fulfilling its part of obligation by going into the verification of those documents, for which applicants cannot be blamed or prejudiced. 15) Since this aspect was hotly debated at the Bar, we have gone into the same in some depth and detail. We find that the issue of refund of ₹ 17,000 crores approximately to the depositors has been raked up by the contemnors/applicants time and again, but to their dismay, this Court has not accepted their plea to this effect, so far. In the writ petition (Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 57 of IA Nos. 59-61 and 62-64 of 2015 Page 14 of 32
15 2014, titled Subrata Roy Sahara v. Union of India & Ors. 1 ), this very plea of exempting the applicants from depositing the amount already redeemed by them was considered at length and rejected. In the said judgment, the Court took note of and expressed its opinion on this aspect at various places. In para 55 of the judgment, the Court observed that such a plea was not accepted even earlier by a three Judge Bench while disposing of Civil Appeal No. 8643 of 2012 vide order dated 05.12.2012, in the following manner: “ During the pendency of the contempt proceedings, we also decided to determine the veracity of the redemption theory, projected by the two companies. As a matter of law, it was not open to the two companies to raise the aforesaid defence. This is because, exactly the same defence was raised by the two companies, when they had approached this Court by filing Civil Appeal No. 8643 of 2012 (and Writ Petition (Civil) No. 527 of 2012). In the aforesaid Civil Appeal, it was submitted on behalf of the two companies that they should be exempted from depositing the amount already redeemed by them. The above contention advanced by the two companies was not accepted , by the three Judge Division Bench, when it disposed of Civil Appeal No. 8643 of 2012 (and Writ Petition (Civil) No. 527 of 2012) by order dated 5.12.2012. It is, therefore, apparent that the instant defence of having already redeemed most of the OFCD's was not open to the two companies (and even the contemnors) . Yet, so as to ensure that no injustice was done, we permitted the two companies to place material on the record of this case to substantite the factum of redemption. 1 (2014) 8 SCC 470 IA Nos. 59-61 and 62-64 of 2015 Page 15 of 32
16 (emphasis supplied)” 16) The Court, thus, went into this issue again permitting the two companies to place requisite material on record to substantiate the factum of redemption and took into consideration whatever material was placed on record. However, it refused to accept the plea of the two companies, which is clear from the following discussion in paras 86 and 108 of the said judgment: “ When asked how disbursements were made to the investors, the response was that 95% of the payments made to the investors were also made by way of cash, the learned Senior Counsel representing the Contemnors (including the petitioner herein) invited our attention to the books of accounts (only general ledger entries) to demonstrate proof of the transactions under reference. Details in this behalf have been recorded by us under heading IX: “A few words about the defence of redemption of OFCDs offered by the two Companies”. The above explanation may seem to be acceptable to the contemnors, but our view is quite the converse. It is not possible for us to accept that the funds amounting to thousands of crores were transacted by way of cash, we would therefore, on the face of it, reject the above explanation tendered on behalf of the two Companies.” 17) The Court further found that in order dated 05.12.2012 in Civil Appeal No. 8643 of 2012, balance amount of ₹ 17,400 crores, together with interest @ 15% per annum, was still payable even after the deposit of ₹ 5,120 crores. It further mentioned that this IA Nos. 59-61 and 62-64 of 2015 Page 16 of 32
17 figure has swelled up to ₹ 36,608 crores. Thereafter, the position was concluded in para 154 as under: “ Therefore, viewed from any angle, there is no substance in the contention advanced on behalf of the two companies that the moneys payable to the investors had been refunded to them. Accordingly, there is no merit in the prayer, that while making payments in compliance with this Court's orders dated 31.08.2012 and 05.12.2012, the two companies were entitled to make deductions of Rs. 17,443 crores (insofar as SIRECL is concerned) and Rs.5,442 crores (insofar as SHICL is concerned).” 18) The aforesaid discussion clinchingly shows, without any cavil of doubt, that the contemnors/applicants have failed to give satisfactory proof of redemption of ₹ 17,400 crores by SIRECL and ₹ 5,442 crores for SHICL. 19) Mr. Sibal, however, drew our attention to certain lines appearing in paragraph 154 of the same judgment and submitted that it is still open to the applicants to demonstrate that the aforesaid amount is redeemed to the depositors and virtually nothing more is payable. This window which was still kept open by the Court in the said paragraph is in the following form: “ 154. “…..Be that as it may, we have still retained a safety valve, inasmuch as, SEBI has been directed to examine the authenticity of the documents produced by the two Companies, and in case SEBI finds that redemptions have IA Nos. 59-61 and 62-64 of 2015 Page 17 of 32
18 actually been made, the two Companies will be refunded the amounts, equal to the redemptions found to have been genuinely made.” 20) No doubt, this much scope is still left for Sahara group. Fact remains that a definite course of action that is to be chartered is also laid down, namely, in the first instance it is obligatory on the part of the contemnors/applicants to deposit the entire balance amount along with interest accrued thereon in the SEBI-Sahara Refund Account. This obligation has to be performed in all circumstances. It is only thereafter, if and when the applicants are able to substantiate the factum of redemption, they would be entitled to refund of the said amount to the extent they are able to prove in this behalf. Therefore, at this stage, one thing which is more than apparent is that after the conditions for interim bail stipulated in order dated 26.03.2014 are fulfilled and pursuant thereto the three contemnors who are in judicial custody are released, the obligation or liability to deposit the balance would still remain. We may remind the contemnors that as per directions dated 05.12.2012, this amount was to be deposited in two installments, first installment by the first week of January 2013 and the second by the first week of February 2013. Therefore, it would be essential for the applicants/contemnors to IA Nos. 59-61 and 62-64 of 2015 Page 18 of 32
19 not only to deposit the balance amount in a time bound schedule but also the manner on which they propose to muster the said amount. This cannot go on endlessly. 21) We are conscious of the fact that three persons are under confinement for the last fifteen months. The circumstances under which orders dated 04.03.2014 were passed taking these persons into custody and sending them to jail are well known. This court was virtually compelled to do so, going by the stubborn attitude of the contemnors in taking the orders dated 31.08.2012 and 05.12.2012 for granted, as if those orders were only on papers and were not meant to be complied with. So many opportunities were given, showing all that leniency which could be extended, to enable the contemnors to comply with those directions. It is only when the Court felt that unless some drastic action is taken there will be no desired effect, that this extreme step was taken. However, this step was taken in good faith to uphold the rule of law and to ensure that dignity of this Court is maintained and there is faithful compliance with its directions. The contemnors, instead of taking steps to follow and fulfil the directions, started making hue and cry. Still, in the application filed immediately thereafter for release, this Court showed desired compassion and IA Nos. 59-61 and 62-64 of 2015 Page 19 of 32
20 empathy by passing orders dated 26.03.2014, thereby paving a way for grant of interim bail. It was, however, with a legitimate condition that out of almost 3₹ 3,000 crores that had become due by that time, the contemnors deposit at least ₹ 10,000 crores, that too with relaxed provision of deposit of 50% thereof by means of bank guarantee only. There was a genuine hope that for the sake of attaining their own freedom, the contemnors shall at least comply with this direction immediately. Since then, though there have been attempts on the part of the contemnors to do the needful, but all in vain. This is notwithstanding the fact that insofar as this Court is concerned, it has shown and extended all support in the form of giving desired facilities in jail; lifting the attachments in respect of those properties chosen by the applicants themselves, for sale/ encumbrances etc.; allowing these applicants to accept the offer of lesser amount than the book value of a particular asset, going by the fact that these were akin to distress sales in a depressed real estate market. May be the applicants now see the light at the end of the tunnel as it is projected that the Sahara companies has finally found the buyers for certain assets and/or financers who are ready to provide the requisite finance against some of the Sahara Companies IA Nos. 59-61 and 62-64 of 2015 Page 20 of 32
21 properties and that would bridge the gap insofar as conditions of interim bail are concerned. However, as mentioned above, the matter does not rest with the deposit of ₹ 5,000 crores and ₹ 5,000 crores by way of bank guarantee. Total liability has swelled to more than ₹ 36,000 crores. The aforesaid deposit of ₹ 10,000 crores is only a condition of interim bail. It is the bounden duty of this Court to ensure that balance amount is also deposited by the applicants. 22) This Court feels concerned with the fact that three persons are deprived of their liberty for the last fifteen months and this situation is quite onerous to them. On the other hand, public interest as well as public good demands that the two Sahara Companies, which had collected whopping amount of more than 22₹ ,000 crores from the public in an illegal and unauthorised manner, are made accountable for the same in the manner it is directed vide orders dated 31.08.2012 and 05.12.2012. By any yardstick, this is a huge liability, which the contemnors are bound to discharge by depositing the same with SEBI. It is, thus, an unprecedented situation of personal liberty of the three applicants on the one hand vis a vis majesty of law and ensuring larger public good, on the other hand. It is this sense of justice, in an IA Nos. 59-61 and 62-64 of 2015 Page 21 of 32
22 unprecedented kind of situation, that has compelled the Court to take such an extreme step. It is this legal realism which has compelled the Court to adopt an approach which sounds more pragmatic. It is “doing what comes naturally” approach to the problem at hand, which required such a drastic step, going by the experience of this case, giving rise to 'Reflection' that provided 'Understanding'. This case is a burning example where the true dictate of justice is difficult to discern, and the law needed to come down on the side of practical convenience. We may borrow the jurisprudential theory propounded by Ronald Dworkin, albeit in somewhat different context, viz. the “conventional jurisprudential wisdom” which holds that in certain cases of a particularly complex or novel character the law does not provide a definite answer. In denying that judges in hard cases have a discretion to determine what the law is, Dworkin has instead argued for the judicial use of public standards or principles in a way that is capable of providing the right legal answer. The process of reaching a right answer in hard cases obviously differs from the process of reaching the legal answer in easy cases. After all, the avowed objective of rule of law is also to ensure that the orders of this Court are respected and obeyed. Therefore, its a classic IA Nos. 59-61 and 62-64 of 2015 Page 22 of 32
23 case where the approach adopted is influenced by the necessity of “making the law work”. Therefore, the orders passed may not be strictly construed as arising out of contempt jurisdiction, but in exercise of inherent jurisdiction vested in this Court to do complete justice in the matter and to ensure that the applicants render full compliance of its orders. It's the unprecedented situation which has led to passing of unprecedented, but justifiable, orders. 23) This Court is not powerless as it can always direct selling the properties of the Sahara Companies to ensure recovery of the aforesaid amount as the value of those properties is stated to be much higher. However, it is not done so far pursuant to the wishes of the applicants who have pleaded against the sale of these properties by the Court with repeated assurances that these companies would be taking necessary steps for generating the desired finances and the Court has accepted their request and given them opportunities and chances to do so. 24) Shri Datar, Senior Counsel for SEBI and Shri Naphade, Amicus Curiae contended and in our view rightly so, that if the format of the bank guarantee is accepted, this Court ought to indicate the IA Nos. 59-61 and 62-64 of 2015 Page 23 of 32
24 circumstances in which the SEBI can seek encashment of the said guarantee. It was argued that the Bank Guarantee as furnished by the contemnors did not indicate a trigger point for encashment which ought to be suitably mentioned and entered either in the guarantee or in the order of this Court. It was further argued that release of the contemnors from the custody even after deposit of a sum of Rs.5000 crores and a bank guarantee of Rs.5000 crores pursuant to the order of this Court was meant only to enable them to deposit the balance amount. It was submitted that in case the contemnors comply with the conditions for release from custody, the next thing they must do is to comply with the directions regarding deposit of the balance amount. This Court, it was argued, should not only direct the deposit of balance amount but provide for the consequences in default of such deposits. The bank guarantee format does not provide for a trigger point for its encashment. Furnishing the bank guarantee without stipulating the situations in which the guarantee shall become encashable, will be meaningless. The Bank guarantee is actually meant to ensure that the entire amount is deposited by the contemnors once they are released from custody. That is because the liability to deposit the amount does not get IA Nos. 59-61 and 62-64 of 2015 Page 24 of 32
25 obliterated by furnishing the bank guarantee which is intended to grant release of the contemnors from custody to enable them to comply with the orders passed by this Court. We have in that view examined several options that may provide for a trigger point for encashment. We are of the view that since most of the properties owned by Sahara group remain frozen by the order of this Court, the contemnors require time to enable them to deposit the balance outstanding. In case the bank guarantee is made encashable on default, the trigger point for encashment would be the default by the contemnors in depositing the balance amount in terms of the directions that we propose to issue. It is in that spirit that we accept the bank guarantee format furnished by the contemnors and grant to them time to deposit the balance amount that remains to be deposited subject to the following conditions: (1) Keeping in view the total liability which according to SEBI, has risen to Rs.36,000 crores (approximately), the contemnors shall deposit the balance outstanding amount within a period of 18 months commencing from the date of their release from custody in nine installments. First eight installments shall be of Rs.3,000 crores payable every two months from the date of their IA Nos. 59-61 and 62-64 of 2015 Page 25 of 32
26 release from custody and last installment shall be of the remaining amount. (2) In the event of the default in payment of two instalments (not necessarily consecutive) the bank guarantee furnished by the contemnors pursuant to the order of this Court shall be encashed by SEBI and the amount so received counted towards part compliance with the earlier directions given by this Court. (3) The bank guarantee shall also be encashable in the event of failure of the contemnors to deposit the full amount outstanding against them within a period of 18 months commencing from the date of their release. (4) In the event of failure of the contemnors to deposit three instalments (not necessarily consecutive), the contemnors shall surrender back to custody and in case they fail to do so, they shall be taken into custody and committed to jail. (5) Since only some of the properties have been released by this Court for sale by the contemnors, the contemnors shall be free to apply for permission to sell any further property within 15 days from their release in order to enable them to raise funds for deposit of the required amount in terms of the order of this Court. IA Nos. 59-61 and 62-64 of 2015 Page 26 of 32
27 (6) Keeping in view the fact that a large amount remains to be deposited by the contemnors, we direct the contemnors to deposit their passports in this Court within 15 days from the date of this order or before their release, whichever is earlier. They shall not leave the country without prior permission of this Court. Insofar as their movements within the country are concerned, they shall keep police station Tilak Marg, New Delhi informed and updated about their whereabouts every fortnight. 25) The Interlocutory Applications stand disposed of on the aforesaid terms. .............................................J. (T.S. THAKUR) .............................................J. (ANIL R. DAVE) .............................................J. (A.K. SIKRI) NEW DELHI; JUNE 19, 2015. IA Nos. 59-61 and 62-64 of 2015 Page 27 of 32
28 1A-For JUDGMENT COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. NOS. 59-61/2015 AND I.A. NOS. 62-64/2015 IN CONTEMPT PET. (C) NOS.412 AND 413 OF 2012 IN C.A. NOS. 9813 AND 9833 OF 2011 AND CONTEMPT PET. (C) NO.260/2013 IN C.A. NO. 8643/2012 S.E.B.I. Appellant(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD. & ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 19/06/2015 These I.As. were called on today for pronouncement of JUDGMENT. Mr. Shekhar Naphade, Sr.Adv.(A.C) (N.P.) For Appellant(s) Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair, Adv. Ms. Niharika, Adv. Mr. Purushottam K. Jha, Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. For M/s. K.J. John & Co. For Respondent(s) Respondent 5 Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Jain, Adv. Mr. Nijam Pasha, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Ms. Sonali Dhir, Adv. Applicant-IT Deptt. Mr. Guru Krishna Kumar, Sr. Adv. Mr. D.L. Chidananda, Adv. Ms. Sadhana Sandhu, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar, Adv. Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh Mrs. Shally Bhasin IA Nos. 59-61 and 62-64 of 2015 Page 28 of 32
29 Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. Niraj Sharma, Adv. Mr. Sarad Kumar Singhania, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Agrawal, Adv. Mr. Ramesh Babu M.R., Adv. Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.K. Sikri pronounced the judgment of the Bench comprising Hon'ble Mr. Justice T.S. Thakur, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anil R. Dave and His Lordship. The Interlocutory Applications stand disposed of in terms of the signed Reportable Judgment. (VINOD KR.JHA) (VEENA KHERA) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER (Signed Reportable Judgment is placed on the file) IA Nos. 59-61 and 62-64 of 2015 Page 29 of 32
30 Item No. 1 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. NOS. 65-67/2015 IN CONTEMPT PET. (C) NO.412 OF 2012 IN C.A. NOS. 9813/2011 AND CONTEMPT PET.(C) No.413/2012 IN C.A. NO.9833 OF 2011 AND CONTEMPT PET. (C) NO.260/2013 IN C.A. NO. 8643/2012 S.E.B.I. Appellant(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD. & ORS. Respondent(s) (For seeking directions and office report) Date : 19/06/2015 These I.As. were called on today for hearing. Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI (SPECIAL BENCH) Mr. Shekhar Naphade, Sr.Adv.(A.C) (NP) For Appellant(s) Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair, Adv. Ms. Niharika, Adv. Mr. Purushottam K. Jha, Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. For M/s. K.J. John & Co. For Respondent(s) Respondent 5 Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Jain, Adv. Mr. Nijam Pasha, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Ms. Sonali Dhir, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv. Applicant-IT Deptt. Mr. Guru Krishna Kumar, Sr. Adv.(N.P.) Mr. D.L. Chidananda, Adv. Ms. Sadhana Sandhu, Adv. IA Nos. 59-61 and 62-64 of 2015 Page 30 of 32
31 Mrs. Anil Katiyar, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. Ramesh Babu M.R., Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Issue notice. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, learned counsel for the appellant accepts notice. Mr. Kapil Sibal and Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, learned senior counsel appearing for the contemnors/applicants pray for extention of the facilities granted to the contemnors vide order dated 23.03.2015 by a further period of eight weeks. Mr. Arvind P. Datar, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant does not oppose the prayer. Therefore, in the circumstances, we extend the facilities granted by us to the applicants by our order dated 23.03.2015, for a further period of eight weeks commencing from 23.06.2015. So far as second prayer (ii) seeking conditional parole is concerned, the same is dismissed as not pressed. I.A. Nos.65-67 of 2015 are disposed of in the aforesaid terms. IA Nos. 59-61 and 62-64 of 2015 Page 31 of 32
32 Learned counsel for the contemnors/applicants prays for six weeks' time to file objections to the additional affidavit in I.A. Nos. 90-91 in Contempt Petition Nos. 412 and 413 of 2012 and 260 of 2013 to the interlocutory application. Permission granted. Accordingly, the same shall be filed within six weeks. (VINOD KR.JHA) (VEENA KHERA) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER IA Nos. 59-61 and 62-64 of 2015 Page 32 of 32
1 ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. 59-61/2015 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 AND CONMT.PET.(C)NO.413/2012 IN C.A.NO.9833/2011 AND CONMT.PET.(C)NO.260/2013 IN C.A.NO.8643/2012 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (For directions/modification and office report) Date: 14/05/2015 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI Mr. Shekhar Naphade,Sr.Adv. (A.C.) Ms. Shubhangi Tuli,Adv. Mr. Vikram Sobti,Adv. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind Datar,Sr.Adv. (SEBI) Mr. Pratap Venugopal,Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman,Adv. Ms. Supriya Jain,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair,Adv. Ms. Niharika,Adv. For M/s. K. J. John & Co. For Applicant (s) Mr. Kapil Sibal,Sr.Adv. (I.A.59-61 & Dr. Rajiv Dhawan,Sr.Adv. 62-64 of 2015) Mr. S. Ganesh,Sr.Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. Mr. Ayush Chaudhary,Adv. Mr. Abhinav Mani Tripathi,Adv. Mr. Nijam Pasha,Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh,Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar,Adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi,Adv. Mr. R.S. Yadav,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. (R.B.I.) Mr. Ramesh Babu M.R.,Adv. Ms. Swati Setia,Adv.
2 For Respondent(s) Mr. Guru Krishna Kumar,Sr.Adv. (Applicant-IT Dept.)Mr. D.L. Chidananda,Adv. Ms. Sadhana Sandhu,Adv. Mrs.Anil Katiyar,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Applications (I.A.No(s).62-64 of 2015) for Direction taken on Board. Arguments heard. Order reserved. (MAHABIR SINGH) (VEENA KHERA) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER
ê 1 ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. 59-61/2015 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 AND CONMT.PET.(C)NO.413/2012 IN C.A.NO.9833/2011 AND CONMT.PET.(C)NO.260/2013 IN C.A.NO.8643/2012 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (For directions/modification and office report) Date: 14/05/2015 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI Mr. Shekhar Naphade,Sr.Adv. (A.C.) Ms. Shubhangi Tuli,Adv. Mr. Vikram Sobti,Adv. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind Datar,Sr.Adv. (SEBI) Mr. Pratap Venugopal,Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman,Adv. Ms. Supriya Jain,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair,Adv. Ms. Niharika,Adv. For M/s. K. J. John & Co. For Applicant (s) Mr. Kapil Sibal,Sr.Adv. (I.A.59-61 & Dr. Rajiv Dhawan,Sr.Adv. 62-64 of 2015) Mr. S. Ganesh,Sr.Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. Mr. Ayush Chaudhary,Adv. Mr. Abhinav Mani Tripathi,Adv. Mr. Nijam Pasha,Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh,Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar,Adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi,Adv.Signature Not Verified Mr. R.S. Yadav,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv.Digitally signed byMahabir SinghDate: 2015.05.1416:47:19 ISTReason: (R.B.I.) Mr. Ramesh Babu M.R.,Adv. Ms. Swati Setia,Adv. 2For Respondent(s) Mr. Guru Krishna Kumar,Sr.Adv.(Applicant-IT Dept.)Mr. D.L. Chidananda,Adv. Ms. Sadhana Sandhu,Adv. Mrs.Anil Katiyar,Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Applications (I.A.No(s).62-64 of 2015) for Directiontaken on Board. Arguments heard. Order reserved.(MAHABIR SINGH) (VEENA KHERA) COURT MASTER COURT MASTERê 1 ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. 59-61/2015 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 AND CONMT.PET.(C)NO.413/2012 IN C.A.NO.9833/2011 AND CONMT.PET.(C)NO.260/2013 IN C.A.NO.8643/2012 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (For directions/modification and office report) Date: 14/05/2015 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI Mr. Shekhar Naphade,Sr.Adv. (A.C.) Ms. Shubhangi Tuli,Adv. Mr. Vikram Sobti,Adv. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind Datar,Sr.Adv. (SEBI) Mr. Pratap Venugopal,Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman,Adv. Ms. Supriya Jain,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair,Adv. Ms. Niharika,Adv. For M/s. K. J. John & Co. For Applicant (s) Mr. Kapil Sibal,Sr.Adv. (I.A.59-61 & Dr. Rajiv Dhawan,Sr.Adv. 62-64 of 2015) Mr. S. Ganesh,Sr.Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. Mr. Ayush Chaudhary,Adv. Mr. Abhinav Mani Tripathi,Adv. Mr. Nijam Pasha,Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh,Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar,Adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi,Adv.Signature Not Verified Mr. R.S. Yadav,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv.Digitally signed by
Mahabir SinghDate: 2015.05.1416:47:19 ISTReason: (R.B.I.) Mr. Ramesh Babu M.R.,Adv. Ms. Swati Setia,Adv. 2For Respondent(s) Mr. Guru Krishna Kumar,Sr.Adv.(Applicant-IT Dept.)Mr. D.L. Chidananda,Adv. Ms. Sadhana Sandhu,Adv. Mrs.Anil Katiyar,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Applications (I.A.No(s).62-64 of 2015) for Directiontaken on Board. Arguments heard. Order reserved.(MAHABIR SINGH) (VEENA KHERA) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER
ITEM NO.302 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. No. 59-61 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 and Conmt.Pet.(C) No.413/2012 in C.A.No.9833/2011 and Conmt.Pet.(C) No.260/2013 in C.A. No.8643/2012 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (For directions/modification and office report) Date : 08/05/2015 These applications were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Shekhar Naphade, Sr. Adv.(A.C.) Ms. Shubhanghi Tuli, Adv. Mr. Vikram Sobti, Adv. Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair, Adv. Ms. Muarika, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, Sr. Adv. Mr. S. Ganesh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Abhinav Mani Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Nijam Pasha, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv. Mr. M.S. Reddy, Adv. Mr. Rahul Tripathi, Adv. Mr. R.S. Yadav, Adv. M/s. K.J. John & Co.Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed byMeenakshi KohliDate: 2015.05.09 Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv.08:04:47 ISTReason: Mr. Ramesh Babu M.R.,Adv. 1 Ms. Swati Setia, Adv. Mr. Arijit Prasad, Adv. Ms. Anil Katiyar,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R
List the matters on 14th May, 2015 at 2.00pm.(MEENAKSHI KOHLI) (VEENA KHERA) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER 2
ITEM NO.802 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A.No..... of 2015 IN CONMT.PET.(C) No(s). 412 & 413 of 2012 In C.A. No(s). 9813 & 9833 of 2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (Appln(s) for Directions/Modifications) Date : 29/04/2015 This matter was mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. AGRAWAL HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI For Petitioner(s) M/s. K. J. John & Co. For Respondent(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal,Sr.Adv. (mentioned by) Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Post Application for Directions/Modification on Friday, the 8 th May, 2015 at 3 p.m. before a Bench comprising Hon'ble Mr. Justice T.S. Thakur, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anil R. Dave and Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.K. Sikri. (MAHABIR SINGH) (VEENA KHERA) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER
Ì ITEM NO.802 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A.No..... of 2015 IN CONMT.PET.(C) No(s). 412 & 413 of 2012 In C.A. No(s). 9813 & 9833 of 2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (Appln(s) for Directions/Modifications) Date : 29/04/2015 This matter was mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. AGRAWAL HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI For Petitioner(s) M/s. K. J. John & Co. For Respondent(s) Mr. Kapil Sibal,Sr.Adv. (mentioned by) Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Post Application for Directions/Modification on Friday, the 8th May, 2015 at 3 p.m. before a Bench comprising Hon'ble Mr. Justice T.S. Thakur, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anil R. Dave and Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.K. Sikri. (MAHABIR SINGH) (VEENA KHERA) COURT MASTER COURT MASTERSignature Not VerifiedDigitally signed byMahabir SinghDate: 2015.04.2916:26:21 ISTReason:
1 ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. 47-49/2015 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 & 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 & 9833/2011 & C.P.(C) No. 260/2013 in C.A. No. 8643/2012 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (For extension of time and office report) Date : 23/03/2015 These applications were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R.DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.SIKRI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair, Adv. Ms. Niharika, Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, Sr. Adv. Mr. S.Ganesh, Sr. Adv. M r. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. Mr. Nijam Pasha, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv. Mr. Sandeep Bajaj, Adv. Mr. Ayush Chaudhary, Adv. Mr. Abhinav Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Aditya Chopra, Adv. Mr. Jitesh Sriavastava, Adv. Mr. R.S.Yadav, Adv.
2 Mr. Shekhar Napahade ,Adv. (A.C.) Ms. Shubhangi Tuli, Adv. Mr. Vikram Sobti, Adv. Mr.Ramesh Bau, Adv. Ms. Swati Setia, Adv,. Mr. P.Chidambaram, Sr. Adv. Mr.Aman Lekhi, Sr. Adv. Mr.Ankur Sehgal, Adv. Mr.Gurpreet Singh, Adv. Mr.Ashwarya Sinha, Adv. MS. Priyanka Sinha, Adv. Mr.Arjit Prasad, Adv. Ms. Anil Katiyar, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R By our Order dated 13.03.2015 we had granted to the Saharas an opportunity to place on record broad features of the deal which they propose to strike in respect of their off-shore properties comprising three hotels two out of which are situate in the United States of America and the third in London. Since the outline of the proposed deal was not shared by the Saharas with counsel appearing for SEBI and Mr. Shekhar Naphade learned Amicus Curiae, Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel appearing for the Saharas had agreed to do so. The whole purpose behind that exercise was to prima facie satisfy ourselves whether the Saharas are indeed making a serious effort to raise funds for compliance with the directions issued by this Court. We had also by the same order extended to the respondents-contemnors the concession of communication with the outside world for 5 hours a day besides allowing them use of two laptops computers.
3 When the matter came up today before us Mr. Sibal filed what is described as “Confidential Note On Proposals Now Being Negotiated and Finalised By Saharas For Complying With Supreme Court Order dated 26.03.2014” In particular Mr. Sibal drew our attention to a communication dated 09.03.2015 from Head of Corporate and Investment Banking Madrid at BBVA to Nouam Limited whereby BBVA Investment Bank has confirmed with full bank responsibility the authenticity and validity of the cash funds to the tune of EUR 900 Million in an account mentioned in the said communication and held by the Nouam Limited represented by Mr. Karan Judge. The letter confirmed legal responsibility that Nouam Limited represented by Mr. Karan Judge has full custody over the said funds in his account and that the said funds shall remain under his instruction. Not only that the communication further states that the funds are legal, good, clean, clear, unencumbered and legitimately earned cash funds of non-criminal origin consisting of 100% cash and that the same are freely available for investment. Mr. Sibal submitted that if permitted by this Court, Saharas can go ahead with the proposal under consideration whereunder Nouam Limited will take over the loan outstanding towards Bank of China. He submitted that the loan/ credit being negotiated will not only pay off the Bank of China but generate an additional 120 million dollars equivalent roughly to Rs. 650 crores in indian rupee. Mr. Sibal urged that although Saharas have a few other proposals also on the anvil yet the proposal mooted by Nouam Limited for the take over of the Bank of China
4 loan and for payment of an additional amount of $160 million dollars appears to be the most serious presently under consideration. In an attempt to show that the proposals under consideration with Saharas are serious, Mr. Sibal also placed reliance upon another letter dated 18.03.2015 addressed by HSBC to M/s. Aambey Valley confirming a Bank guarantee for a sum of $820 million equivalent to INR 5000 crores in favour of Aambey Valley Limited, Sahara Star Domestic Airport, Bombay. The Bank guarantee is according to the said communication irrevocable, divisible and transferable to any supplier of M/s. Aambey Valley Limited. Mr. Sibal submitted that although the communication offers the bank guarantee to Aambey Valley Limited, steps will be taken to ensure that the bank guarantee of Rs. 5,000/- crores is furnished in the name of SEBI in compliance with the orders of this Court. Our attention was also drawn by Mr. Sibal to a Memorandum of Understanding said to have been executed between Nouam Limited and Aambey Valley Limited in connection with the proposed deal referred to above. It was submitted by Mr. Sibal that the availability of funds with Nouam Limited, the assurance regarding the issue of a bank guarantee for a sum of Rs. 5,000/- crores and the execution of a Memo of Understanding between Nouam Limited and Aambay Valley Limited should sufficiently reassure this Court that Saharas are seriously pursuing the finalisation of the deal. It was in the above context urged that this Court could permit
5 the Saharas to process the deal to its logical conclusion and to present to this Court a final proposal whereunder the Saharas would deposit the balance of the amount required for the release of the respondents from custody on bail and for the Bank guarantee which is one of the conditions for that release. On behalf of SEBI Mr. Arvind Datar very fairly stated that Saharas do appear to be taking some steps for finalising the deal and that so long as the deal results in raising funds that would find their way into the SEBI account in compliance with the orders of this Court, SEBI will have no real objection to the process being taken forward. Mr. Napahde, learned A.C. submitted that even though relevant documents touching the proposed deal were available to him rather late and even though certain matters remain to be clarified, there is no real impediment in allowing Saharas as a last chance to finalise the proposed deal with Nouam Limited. In the circumstance therefore and keeping in view the steps that Saharas appear to have taken in the matter of finalising their proposed deal with the Nouam Limited we see no reason why a last and final opportunity be not granted to Saharas to do the needful. We have made it clear to learned counsel for the respondents and to others appearing for Saharas that should there be any difficulty in finalising the deal with Nouam Limited, we shall be left with no option but to explore the alternative option of appointing a Receiver for sale of the property to recover the outstanding amount. That being made clear we permit
6 Saharas to negotiate the proposed deal with Nouam Limited. We make it clear that since this is going to be the last and final opportunity to the Saharas to sell or encumber the properties themselves to raise funds, Saharas shall also have the liberty to negotiate any other deal qua the said three off-shore properties should the deal with Nouam Limited for any reason fail to fructify. Needful shall be done within the outer limit of three months from today. In order to facilitate the finalisation of the proposed deal we permit use of facility to the respondents in terms of our order dated August 1, 2014 for a period from three months today. Mr. Sibal next argued that out of nine properties situate within the country which this Court had permitted the Saharas to sell, five properties have already been sold while the remaining four properties according to Mr. Sibal can not fetch the required amount within 5% of the estimated value declared by the Saharas. He therefore urged that this Court could modify the order permitting the sale of such properties so as to allow the sale of remaining four items of properties at prices less up to 25 to 40% as indicated in paragraph C at page 5 of his Note (supra). Alternatively Mr. Sibal argued that this Court could allow the Saharas to sell one or more properties out of the ten properties situate in different parts of the country set out at page 7 of the note with the extent mentioned against each as also the circle rates and the market valuation.
7 From a perusal of the statement set out at page 7 of the compilation it appears that although the value of the properties set out in the said statement calculated on the Circle rates comes to Rs. 456.46 crores, the land value as per market valuation is said to be more than Rs. 570 crores. We are in that view inclined to allow the alternative prayer made by Mr. Sibal and permit the Saharas to sell one or more properties mentioned at page 7 of the compilation on the same terms and conditions as were stipulated by us in our Order dated 04.06.2014. At this stage Mr. Sibal submitted that in the event of any shortfall/difficulty in selling the properties in the prices indicated by them or on the conditions set out by us we could also permit Saharas to sell up to 600 acres of the developed buildable land area in Aambey Valley at a price which shall not be less than Rs. 6.55 crores per acre. We do not see any reason to decline that prayer either especially when the value of land fixed at Rs. 6.55/- crores per acre is many times in excess of 25 lakhs per acre fixed by the SEBI in its affidavit dated 16.03.2012 filed in I.As No. 6-7 of 2012. We accordingly permit the Saharas to sell up to 600 acres of land in Aambey Valley @ Rs. 6.50 crores per acre. The details of the extent sold shall be furnished to the Court by Saharas. Mr. P.Chidamabaram, learned senior counsel appearing for Mirach Capital Group LLC proposes to make an application to make an offer in a sealed cover. He is permitted to do so with copy to learned counsel for the parties.
8 The note filed by Saharas shall be kept in a sealed cover. These proceedings shall stand over for a period of three months. At this stage Mr. Arvind Datar submits that some of the purchasers of the Gurgaon property have sought rescheduling of the payments and that the SEBI has received certain cheques as per the new schedule proposed. We permit the SEBI to receive and encash the same. Fresh undertakings filed by the purchasers to abide by the re-scheduled payment are accepted. (Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) Court Master Court Master
Èp 1 ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. 47-49/2015 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 & 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 & 9833/2011 & C.P.(C) No. 260/2013 in C.A. No. 8643/2012 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (For extension of time and office report) Date : 23/03/2015 These applications were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R.DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.SIKRI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair, Adv. Ms. Niharika, Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, Sr. Adv. Mr. S.Ganesh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. Mr. Nijam Pasha, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv.Signature Not Verified Mr. Sandeep Bajaj, Adv.Digitally signed by Mr. Ayush Chaudhary, Adv.Shashi SareenDate: 2015.03.2508:56:10 IST Mr. Abhinav Tripathi, Adv.Reason: Mr. Aditya Chopra, Adv. Mr. Jitesh Sriavastava, Adv. Mr. R.S.Yadav, Adv. 2 Mr. Shekhar Napahade ,Adv. (A.C.) Ms. Shubhangi Tuli, Adv. Mr. Vikram Sobti, Adv. Mr.Ramesh Bau, Adv. Ms. Swati Setia, Adv,. Mr. P.Chidambaram, Sr. Adv. Mr.Aman Lekhi, Sr. Adv.
Mr.Ankur Sehgal, Adv. Mr.Gurpreet Singh, Adv. Mr.Ashwarya Sinha, Adv. MS. Priyanka Sinha, Adv. Mr.Arjit Prasad, Adv. Ms. Anil Katiyar, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R By our Order dated 13.03.2015 we had granted to theSaharas an opportunity to place on record broad features of thedeal which they propose to strike in respect of their off-shoreproperties comprising three hotels two out of which are situate inthe United States of America and the third in London. Since theoutline of the proposed deal was not shared by the Saharas withcounsel appearing for SEBI and Mr. Shekhar Naphade learned AmicusCuriae, Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel appearing for theSaharas had agreed to do so. The whole purpose behind thatexercise was to prima facie satisfy ourselves whether the Saharasare indeed making a serious effort to raise funds for compliancewith the directions issued by this Court. We had also by the sameorder extended to the respondents-contemnors the concession ofcommunication with the outside world for 5 hours a day besidesallowing them use of two laptops computers. 3 When the matter came up today before us Mr. Sibal filed whatis described as "Confidential Note On Proposals Now BeingNegotiated and Finalised By Saharas For Complying With SupremeCourt Order dated 26.03.2014" In particular Mr. Sibal drew ourattention to a communication dated 09.03.2015 from Head ofCorporate and Investment Banking Madrid at BBVA to Nouam Limitedwhereby BBVA Investment Bank has confirmed with full bankresponsibility the authenticity and validity of the cash funds tothe tune of EUR 900 Million in an account mentioned in the saidcommunication and held by the Nouam Limited represented by Mr.Karan Judge. The letter confirmed legal responsibility that NouamLimited represented by Mr. Karan Judge has full custody over thesaid funds in his account and that the said funds shall remain
under his instruction. Not only that the communication furtherstates that the funds are legal, good, clean, clear, unencumberedand legitimately earned cash funds of non-criminal originconsisting of 100% cash and that the same are freely availablefor investment. Mr. Sibal submitted that if permitted by thisCourt, Saharas can go ahead with the proposal under considerationwhereunder Nouam Limited will take over the loan outstandingtowards Bank of China. He submitted that the loan/ credit beingnegotiated will not only pay off the Bank of China but generate anadditional 120 million dollars equivalent roughly to Rs. 650crores in indian rupee. Mr. Sibal urged that although Saharashave a few other proposals also on the anvil yet the proposalmooted by Nouam Limited for the take over of the Bank of China 4loan and for payment of an additional amount of $160 milliondollars appears to be the most serious presently underconsideration. In an attempt to show that the proposals under considerationwith Saharas are serious, Mr. Sibal also placed reliance uponanother letter dated 18.03.2015 addressed by HSBC to M/s. AambeyValley confirming a Bank guarantee for a sum of $820 millionequivalent to INR 5000 crores in favour of Aambey Valley Limited,Sahara Star Domestic Airport, Bombay. The Bank guarantee isaccording to the said communication irrevocable, divisible andtransferable to any supplier of M/s. Aambey Valley Limited. Mr.Sibal submitted that although the communication offers the bankguarantee to Aambey Valley Limited, steps will be taken to ensurethat the bank guarantee of Rs. 5,000/- crores is furnished in thename of SEBI in compliance with the orders of this Court. Our attention was also drawn by Mr. Sibal to a Memorandum ofUnderstanding said to have been executed between Nouam Limited andAambey Valley Limited in connection with the proposed deal
referred to above. It was submitted by Mr. Sibal that theavailability of funds with Nouam Limited, the assurance regardingthe issue of a bank guarantee for a sum of Rs. 5,000/- crores andthe execution of a Memo of Understanding between Nouam Limited andAambay Valley Limited should sufficiently reassure this Courtthat Saharas are seriously pursuing the finalisation of thedeal. It was in the above context urged that this Court could permit 5the Saharas to process the deal to its logical conclusion and topresent to this Court a final proposal whereunder the Saharaswould deposit the balance of the amount required for the releaseof the respondents from custody on bail and for the Bank guaranteewhich is one of the conditions for that release. On behalf of SEBI Mr. Arvind Datar very fairly statedthat Saharas do appear to be taking some steps for finalising thedeal and that so long as the deal results in raising funds thatwould find their way into the SEBI account in compliance with theorders of this Court, SEBI will have no real objection to theprocess being taken forward. Mr. Napahde, learned A.C. submitted that even though relevantdocuments touching the proposed deal were available to him ratherlate and even though certain matters remain to be clarified, thereis no real impediment in allowing Saharas as a last chance tofinalise the proposed deal with Nouam Limited. In the circumstance therefore and keeping in view the stepsthat Saharas appear to have taken in the matter of finalisingtheir proposed deal with the Nouam Limited we see no reason why alast and final opportunity be not granted to Saharas to do theneedful. We have made it clear to learned counsel for therespondents and to others appearing for Saharas that should therebe any difficulty in finalising the deal with Nouam Limited, weshall be left with no option but to explore the alternativeoption of appointing a Receiver for sale of the property torecover the outstanding amount. That being made clear we permit 6
Saharas to negotiate the proposed deal with Nouam Limited. Wemake it clear that since this is going to be the last and finalopportunity to the Saharas to sell or encumber the propertiesthemselves to raise funds, Saharas shall also have the liberty tonegotiate any other deal qua the said three off-shore propertiesshould the deal with Nouam Limited for any reason fail tofructify. Needful shall be done within the outer limit of threemonths from today. In order to facilitate the finalisation of theproposed deal we permit use of facility to the respondents interms of our order dated August 1, 2014 for a period from threemonths today. Mr. Sibal next argued that out of nine properties situatewithin the country which this Court had permitted the Saharas tosell, five properties have already been sold while the remainingfour properties according to Mr. Sibal can not fetch the requiredamount within 5% of the estimated value declared by the Saharas.He therefore urged that this Court could modify the orderpermitting the sale of such properties so as to allow the sale ofremaining four items of properties at prices less up to 25 to 40%as indicated in paragraph C at page 5 of his Note (supra). Alternatively Mr. Sibal argued that this Court could allowthe Saharas to sell one or more properties out of the tenproperties situate in different parts of the country set out atpage 7 of the note with the extent mentioned against each as alsothe circle rates and the market valuation. 7 From a perusal of the statement set out at page 7 of thecompilation it appears that although the value of the propertiesset out in the said statement calculated on the Circle ratescomes to Rs. 456.46 crores, the land value as per market valuationis said to be more than Rs. 570 crores. We are in that viewinclined to allow the alternative prayer made by Mr. Sibal andpermit the Saharas to sell one or more properties mentioned atpage 7 of the compilation on the same terms and conditions as werestipulated by us in our Order dated 04.06.2014.
At this stage Mr. Sibal submitted that in the event of anyshortfall/difficulty in selling the properties in the pricesindicated by them or on the conditions set out by us we could alsopermit Saharas to sell up to 600 acres of the developed buildableland area in Aambey Valley at a price which shall not be less thanRs. 6.55 crores per acre. We do not see any reason to decline that prayer eitherespecially when the value of land fixed at Rs. 6.55/- crores peracre is many times in excess of 25 lakhs per acre fixed by theSEBI in its affidavit dated 16.03.2012 filed in I.As No. 6-7 of2012. We accordingly permit the Saharas to sell up to 600 acresof land in Aambey Valley @ Rs. 6.50 crores per acre. The detailsof the extent sold shall be furnished to the Court by Saharas. Mr. P.Chidamabaram, learned senior counsel appearing forMirach Capital Group LLC proposes to make an application to makean offer in a sealed cover. He is permitted to do so with copy tolearned counsel for the parties. 8 The note filed by Saharas shall be kept in a sealedcover. These proceedings shall stand over for a period of threemonths. At this stage Mr. Arvind Datar submits that some of thepurchasers of the Gurgaon property have sought rescheduling ofthe payments and that the SEBI has received certain cheques as perthe new schedule proposed. We permit the SEBI to receive andencash the same. Fresh undertakings filed by the purchasers toabide by the re-scheduled payment are accepted.(Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) Court Master Court Master
1 ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. 47-49/2015 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 & 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 & 9833/2011 No(s). S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (for extension of time and office report) Date : 13/03/2015 These applications were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R.DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.SIKRI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair, Adv. Ms. Niharika, Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, Sr. Adv. Mr. S.Ganesh, Sr. Adv. M r. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. Mr. Nijam Pasha, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv. Mr. Sandeep Bajaj, Adv. Mr. Ayush Chaudhary, Adv. Mr. abhinav Tripathi, Adv. Mr.Aditya Chopra, Adv. Mr. Shekhar Napahade ,Adv. (A.C.) Ms. Shubhangi Tuli, Adv. Mr.Vikram Sobti, Adv.
2 Mr.Ramesh Bau, Adv. Ms. Swati Setia, Adv,. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R By our Order dated 24.02.2015 we had allowed Reserve Bank of India to initiate such proceedings as were called for under the provisions of Reserve Bank of India Act against the alleged acts of omission and commission committed by Sahara India Financial Corporation Limited. Mr. Ramesh Babu, learned counsel appearing for the Reserve Bank of India today submits that the Bank has already intiated action and served a show-cause notice upon the company concerned and that it would take further steps in the matter no sooner a reply to that notice is received. We had also by the same order directed the Saharas to file an affidavit explaining the circumstances in which the securities and fixed deposits etc. were encashed/sold and the maturity value/sale consideration thereof transferred to Sahara India instead of being deposited in the SEBI Sahara Refund Account. Saharas have filed an affidavit in compliance with the said direction. Mr. Arvind Datar learned senior counsel for the respondent and Mr. Ramesh Babu, learned counsel pray
3 for and are granted two weeks' time to respond to the said affidavit. Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent submits that the respondents are in the process of negotiating a deal in regard to its off-shore properties to comply with the orders passed by this Court. He submits that an out line of the proposed deal which will generate sufficient funds to enable the respondents to comply with the directions of this Court shall be furnished to Mr. Shekhar Naphade, learned A.C. as also Mr. Datar within one week from today along with requisite documents to demonstrate that the deal is a serious attempt to raise money against the off-shore assets of the companies. Mr. Sibal further submits that the respondents shall co-operate and furnish such further information as may be demanded by the A.C. and Mr. Datar in relation to proposed deal. Mr. Sibal Submits that although two earlier attempts to negotiate a somewhat similar deal have proved abortive, a third and final chance could be given to the respondents to raise the requisite amount of money for discharge of its liability in terms of the orders passed by this court. We have in the previous orders passed by us from
4 time to time noticed how despite facilities which the respondents had demanded while in custody, the proposed deals had failed to fructify. We have in the light of that experience put it to learned counsel for the respondent that we are inclined to appoint a receiver for the properties owned by Saharas in question and to authorise the receiver to alienate the same with a view to compling with the directions of this Court. Mr. Sibal however fervently argued that the need for appointing a receiver may not arise if a final chance is given to Saharas to negotiate and finalise a suitable deal that would ensure that the directtons of this Court are complied with. We are inclined to accept the prayer made by Mr.Sibal. We, therefore, grant to the respondents yet another opportunity to negotiate the proposed deal the outline whereof shall be shared by the respondents with counsel for the SEBI and the A.C.. Mr.Sibal submits that in order to save time we could restore the facility earlier extended to the respondent within the jail precints. He urged that this would help the respondents in finalising the deal early. We are not for the present inclined to extend the facility earlier directed by us for the outline of the proposed deal
5 remains to be criticlaly examined by the A.C. and counsel for SEBI. We however see no difficulty in extending to “five hours a day” the concession of communication with the outside world infavour of the respondents besides two lap top computors. The jail authoriteis would make sure that the facility limited to communciation for a period of five hours a day and two lap-tops only are extended to the respondents. This matter shall now stand adjourned, to be posted again on 23.03.2015 at 2.00 P.M. (Shashi Sareen) Court Master (Veena Khera) Court Master
¼9 1 ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. 47-49/2015 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 & 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 & 9833/2011 No(s). S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (for extension of time and office report) Date : 13/03/2015 These applications were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R.DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.SIKRI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair, Adv. Ms. Niharika, Adv. M/s. K. J. John & Co.,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, Sr. Adv. Mr. S.Ganesh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. Mr. Nijam Pasha, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv. Mr. Sandeep Bajaj, Adv.Signature Not Verified Mr. Ayush Chaudhary, Adv.Digitally signed by Mr. abhinav Tripathi, Adv.Shashi SareenDate: 2015.03.1405:13:17 IST Mr.Aditya Chopra, Adv.Reason: Mr. Shekhar Napahade ,Adv. (A.C.) Ms. Shubhangi Tuli, Adv. Mr.Vikram Sobti, Adv. 2 Mr.Ramesh Bau, Adv. Ms. Swati Setia, Adv,. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R
By our Order dated 24.02.2015 we had allowedReserve Bank of India to initiate such proceedings aswere called for under the provisions of Reserve Bank ofIndia Act against the alleged acts of omission andcommission committed by Sahara India FinancialCorporation Limited. Mr. Ramesh Babu, learned counselappearing for the Reserve Bank of India today submitsthat the Bank has already intiated action and served ashow-cause notice upon the company concerned and that itwould take further steps in the matter no sooner a replyto that notice is received. We had also by the same order directed the Saharasto file an affidavit explaining the circumstances inwhich the securities and fixed deposits etc. wereencashed/sold and the maturity value/sale considerationthereof transferred to Sahara India instead of beingdeposited in the SEBI Sahara Refund Account. Saharashave filed an affidavit in compliance with the saiddirection. Mr. Arvind Datar learned senior counsel forthe respondent and Mr. Ramesh Babu, learned counsel pray 3for and are granted two weeks' time to respond to thesaid affidavit. Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel appearingfor the respondent submits that the respondents are inthe process of negotiating a deal in regard to itsoff-shore properties to comply with the orders passed bythis Court. He submits that an out line of theproposed deal which will generate sufficient funds toenable the respondents to comply with the directions ofthis Court shall be furnished to Mr. Shekhar Naphade,learned A.C. as also Mr. Datar within one week fromtoday along with requisite documents to demonstrate thatthe deal is a serious attempt to raise money against the
off-shore assets of the companies. Mr. Sibal further submits that the respondentsshall co-operate and furnish such further information asmay be demanded by the A.C. and Mr. Datar in relation toproposed deal. Mr. Sibal Submits that although twoearlier attempts to negotiate a somewhat similar dealhave proved abortive, a third and final chance could begiven to the respondents to raise the requisite amountof money for discharge of its liability in terms of theorders passed by this court. We have in the previous orders passed by us from 4time to time noticed how despite facilities which therespondents had demanded while in custody, the proposeddeals had failed to fructify. We have in the light ofthat experience put it to learned counsel for therespondent that we are inclined to appoint a receiverfor the properties owned by Saharas in question and toauthorise the receiver to alienate the same with a viewto compling with the directions of this Court. Mr.Sibal however fervently argued that the need forappointing a receiver may not arise if a final chance isgiven to Saharas to negotiate and finalise a suitabledeal that would ensure that the directtons of this Courtare complied with. We are inclined to accept the prayer made byMr.Sibal. We, therefore, grant to the respondents yetanother opportunity to negotiate the proposed deal theoutline whereof shall be shared by the respondents withcounsel for the SEBI and the A.C.. Mr.Sibal submitsthat in order to save time we could restore thefacility earlier extended to the respondent within thejail precints. He urged that this would help therespondents in finalising the deal early. We are not
for the present inclined to extend the facility earlierdirected by us for the outline of the proposed deal 5remains to be criticlaly examined by the A.C. andcounsel for SEBI. We however see no difficulty inextending to "five hours a day" the concession ofcommunication with the outside world infavour of therespondents besides two lap top computors. The jailauthoriteis would make sure that the facility limited tocommunciation for a period of five hours a day and twolap-tops only are extended to the respondents. This matter shall now stand adjourned, to be postedagain on 23.03.2015 at 2.00 P.M. (Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) Court Master Court Master
1 ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A.NOS. 47-55 IN C.P.(C)NO.412 & 413/2012 IN C.A.NO.9813 & 9833/2011 & C.P.(C)NO.260/2013 IN C.A.NO.8643/2012 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (For extension of order of this Hon'ble Court dated 09.01.2015 and impleadment and extension of time to make the payment and office report) Date : 24/02/2015 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI Mr. Shekhar Napahade,Sr.Adv.(A.C.) Ms. Shubhangi Tuli,Adv. Mr. Vikram Sobti,Adv. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P. Datar,Sr.Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal,Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman,Adv. Ms. Supriya Jain,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair,Adv. Ms. Niharika,Adv. For M/s. K. J. John & Co. (I.A.Nos.50-52) Mr. Parag P. Tripathi,Adv. Mr. Ramesh Babu M. R.,Adv. Ms. Swati Setia,Adv. (I.A.Nos.53-55) Mr. Paras Kuhad,Sr.Adv. Mr. Gaurav Agrawal,Adv. Mr. Omkar Geedh,Adv. Ms. Swati V.,Adv. For Respondent(s)/ Dr. Rajiv Dhawan,Sr.Adv. (Applicant(s) Mr. S. Ganesh,Sr.Adv. in I.A.Nos.47-49) Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan,Adv. Mr. Aarohi Bhalla,Adv.
2 Mr. Jitesh Shrivastava,Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary,Adv. Mr. Abhinav Mani Tripathi,Adv. Mr. P.K. Rao,Adv. Ms. Amrita Narayan,Adv. Mr. Sujit Keshrail,Adv. Mr. Aditya Chopra,Adv. Mr. Raghav G.,Adv. Mr. Piyush Chuadhary,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Heard. I.As.No.50-52 of 2015: These applications have been filed by Reserve Bank of India seeking addition as party respondent to these proceedings. From a reading of the averments made in the applications and the submission made in support of the same and keeping in view the fact that the parties do not have any objection to the prayer being allowed, we add Reserve Bank of India as a party respondent to these proceedings. I.A.Nos.50-52 of 2015 are accordingly allowed and disposed of. I.A.No...... of 2015 in I.A. Nos.101-103 in Contempt Petition Nos.9813 and 9833 of 2011 and Contempt Petition (c) No.260 of 2013 in Civil Appeal No.8643 of 2012 – (Application for Modification of Order dated 4 th June, 2014 passed by this Court) : Taken on Board. Mr. Parag P. Tripathi, learned senior counsel for the applicant-Reserve Bank of India, submits that in terms of the report of the Auditors of Sahara India Financial Corporation Limited, one of the Sahara Group of Companies, FDs, Bonds and
3 Securities held by the said company have been encashed pursuant to an order of this Court dated 4 th June, 2014 and sale proceeds/maturity value of Rs.484.67 crores lent to Sahara India a Parnership Firm instead of depositing the same in the “SEBI Sahara Refund Account” as directed by this Court. He submits that by encashing the securities which the Sahara India Financial Corporation Limited was required to maintain in terms of the directions issued by the Reserve Bank of India dated 17 th June, 2008, the Saharas have not only committed a breach of the direction issued by the Reserve Bank of India but also violated the order passed by this Court. He submits that violation of this Court's order can be separately dealt with by this Court in these proceedings, but Reserve Bank of India who propose to take note of the breach committed by the Sahara company, aforementioned, and initiate proceedings against it under the relevant provisions of the Reserve Bank of India Act should be permitted to do so, after due notice to the company concerned. Mr. S. Ganesh, learned senior counsel for the contemnors, submits that the report submitted by the Auditors does not appear to be factually correct and stands substantially contradicted by letter dated 23 rd February, 2015 sent by Sahara Indian Financial Corporation Limited to Reserve Bank of India. He further states that although a sum of Rs.484.67 crores has transferred to Sahara India a Partnership Firm but the same is not a loan as alleged. The amount in-question has been transferred to the said partnership firm for repayment to the
4 depositors/investors and has been utilised for that purpose. He submits that Saharas have no objection to Reserve Bank of India being given the liberty to initiate whatever proceedings it proposes to start but seeks time to explain to this Court the alleged violation of the order of this Court dated 4 th June, 2014 by which the entire maturity value/sale consideration of the security had to be deposited in the “SEBI Sahara Refund Account” only. In the circumstances, we allow Reserve Bank of India to initiate such action as may be otherwise legally permissible under the provisions of the Reserve Bank of India Act and the Regulations framed thereunder and to pass appropriate orders on the subject after hearing the parties. A copy of the order so passed shall be placed on record. Mr. Ganesh may also in the meantime file an affidavit explaining the circumstances in which the securities in-question which were allowed to be encashed/sold were sold and the maturity value/sale consideration thereof transferred to Sahara India instead of being deposited in the “SEBI Sahara Refund Account” as directed by this Court. The affidavit, to be filed by Mr. Ganesh, shall also indicate whether the disbursements have been made to the depositors/investors in cash or by cheques and whether the identity of the recipients has been established before making all such disbursements. The information relating to disbursement made by Sahara India Financial Corporation Limited to the investors/depositors shall also be placed on record in the form of a DVD/CD with
5 copies to M/s. Parag P. Tripathy, Arvind P. Datar and Shekhar Naphade. In the light of the controversy raised before us in relation to the utilisation of the maturity amount/sale value of the “directed securities”, we deem it fit to direct that the Saharas will not transfer, alienate or encumber the remaining “directed securities” if any provided by Sahara India Financial Corporation Limited (SIFCL). I.As. No.47-49 of 2015 : Issue notice to counsel opposite. Objection, if any, be filed within two weeks from today. Post on Friday, the 13 th March, 2015 at 2 p.m. (MAHABIR SINGH) (VEENA KHERA) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER
1 ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. Nos.31-33, 34-36, 43-44 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 & 413/2012 in C.A. No. 9813/2011 and 9833/2011, I.A. Nos. 90-91 in C.A. No. 9813 of 2011 and 9833/2011 and C.P.(C) No. 260/2013 in C.A. No. 8643 of 2012 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (For appropriate directions and modification/relaxation and Directions and permission to file appln. For direction and office report) with T.C.(C) No. 83 of 2014, 87/2014, 86/2014, 84/2014 and 85/2014 Date: 09/01/2015 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI Mr. Shekhar Naphade,Sr.Adv. (A.C.) Ms. Shubhangi Tuli,Adv. Mr. Vikram Sobti,Adv. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind Datar,Sr.Adv. (SEBI) Mr. Pratap Venugopal,Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman,Adv. Ms. Supriya Jain,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair,Adv. For M/s. K. J. John & Co. For Applicant (s) Mr. S. Ganesh,Sr.Adv. Dr. Rajiv Dhawan,Sr.Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan,Adv. Mr. Aarohi Bhalla,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. Ms. Amrita Narayan,Adv. Mr. Sujit Keshri,Adv. Mr. Raghav Ghei, Adv. Mr. P.K.Rao, Adv.
2 Ms.Sujata Kurdukar, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Niraj Sharma, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R I.As. No. 37-39: Taken on Board By our order dated 22.07.2014 we had allowed I.As No. 10 -12 of 2014 filed by the contemnors and permitted Saharas to transfer, sell or encumber three offshore hotel properties owned by them subject to the condition that the entire sale consideration received by the Saharas after repayment of the loan outstanding towards the Bank of China is deposited with SEBI in compliance with the directions contained in the conditional bail order of this Court dated 26.03.2014. We had further directed that the excess amount, if any, shall be deposited by the Saharas in a separate account to await orders from this Court regarding their utilisation and that the sale of offshore properties shall not be at a price lesser than the value estimated by CBRE and JLL for the said properties reduced at the most by 5% of such value. Pursuant to the above order Saharas had started negotiations with the parties willing to purchase the said offshore properties. In the course of the said negotiations a certain “In Principle Agreement” was also it appears drawn up but before the deal could
3 be finalised difficulties appear to have arisen on account of adverse publicity and demonstration by a section of the public against the proposed sale of the properties to a particular entity. To cut the long story short the proposed sale of the property in terms of the In Principle Agreement has in due course fallen through leaving no option for the Saharas except to explore alternative methods of sale/transfer or mortgage of the said properties to raise the requisite amount. It is in that backdrop that Saharas have filed I.As.No. 37-39 in which among others they have sought from this Court the following two reliefs: a) Grant its permission, whether by Oasis or by some other arty, of Bank of China's loans to Sahara (including the related securities) and the amendment of the terms and conditions applicable to such loans. b) grant its permission for raising of additional junior loans of up to US$650 million and the creation of subordinate charges on the said 3 foreign hotel properties (or on Sahara's shareholding in the relevant hotel owning companies) When these IAs came up for hearing before us on 02.12.2014 we were informed by M/s. Rajeev Dhawan and S.Ganesh senior advocates that in terms of the fresh proposal mooted by Sharas the Bank of China's outstanding loan shall be repaid by substituting another
4 lender in its place with the permission of this Court. Besides Sharas propose to raise an additional junior loan for a sum of Us 640 millions against the offshore properties mentioned above. M/s. Arvind Datar, appearing for SEBI and Shekhar Naphade as an Amicus Curiae had sought some time to examine the proposed transactions and the documents relating thereto. They had also asked for certain further information in regard to certain aspects before they make their submissions. We are told by Mr. Ganesh that queries raised by the learned counsel opposite have since been answered and explained in writing and that what remains is only an apprehension expressed by M/s Naphade and Datar regarding the permissiblity of bringing into India the money that may be raised towards proposed junior loan against the said properties. Mr. Naphade holds the view that no amount borrowed from outside the country can be brought into India with a view to repaying any outstanding liability. He urged that apart from statutory and other complications in the matter. Sahara may have to seek the permission of the competent authority in the Reserve Bank of India under the provisions of FEMA and the regulations framed thereunder. On behalf of Saharas it was argued by M/s. Dhawan and Ganesh that there is a certain amount of urgency in the finalisation of the proposed deals by which Bank of China has to exit upon
5 repayment of the loan outstanding towards it, by arranging funds from a new lender introduced as a mortgagee of the properties. They have placed before us a communication dated 05.01.2015 addressed by the Bank of America to Sahara India Pariwar inter alia stating that under directions from M/s. Mirach Capital Group LLC an amount of USD 1050 million remains blocked and earmarked till February 20, 2015 for the transactions being processed between Mirach and Sahara. The letter further states that Mirach Capital Group LLC has advised Bank of America to disburse USD 650 million out of the said unencumbered funds of USD 1050 million for junior loan transaction as agreed between Amby Valley (Mauritius) Limited and Mirach Capital Group LLC after the execution of necessary legally binding definitive agreements and in accordance with the terms as mentioned in offer letter dated December 15, 2014 issued by Mirach Capital Group LLC and accepted by Amby Valley (Mauritius) Limited. The letter further affirms that Mirach Capital Group LLC has advised Bank of America to disburse USD 400 million out of the said unencumbered funds of USD 1050 million for the purpose of making an investment in Sahara Hospitality Limited as per offer letter dated December 15, 2015 issued by Mirach Capital Group LLC after the execution of necessary investment and ancilliary agreements. What is significant is that according to the communication aforementioned
6 Bank of America is also under instructions from Mirach Capital Group LLC to unblock the said funds of USD 1050 million if the junior loan agreement for USD 650 million and investment agreement with Sahara Hospitality Limited for USD 400 million is not executed by the nd of business on February 20th, 2015. It was argued that although funds required for finalising the deal between the companies aforementioned have been blocked up to February 20, 2015 keeping in view the huge amount involved and the fact that blocking of the said amount would deprive the parties concerned of the beneficial use thereof, there is a great deal of urgency in finalising the transactions which are bound to take some time before the same are clinched by February 20, 2015, the date fixed under the instructions. As regards the apprehension expressed by M/s. Naphade and Datar regarding repatriation of the amount so raised from America to India for being utilised in the manner directed by this Court, it was argued that the amount in question will first be credited in the account of Ambey Valley (Mauritius) Limited which is a wholly owned subsidiary company of Ambey Vally Limited incorporated in India. It was also submitted that any apprehension regarding misutilisation or diversion of those funds can be allayed by a direction from this Court to the Saharas to issue specific instructions to its subsidiary Ambey Valley
7 (Mauritius) Limited not to deal with the said money or utilise the same in any manner without the permission of this Court. Insofar as the legal impediments arising out of the provisions of FEMA and other related regulations governing transfer of funds from outside India to this country for liquidation of any outstanding liability are concerned it was argued that so long as the funds remain parked with Ambey Valley (Mauritius) Limited which is the subsidiary of Ambey Valley Limited, the funds are secure against any misdirection or misutilisation. It was submitted that according to the petitioner's understanding there was no impediment in transferring the funds to India as Ambey Valley (Mauritius) Limited owes an amount of USD 540 million towards a loan which Ambey Valley (Mauritius) Limited has borrowed from its 100% holding company in the year 2010. The amount available to Ambey Valley (Mauritius) Limited pursuant to the proposed transactions will enable the said company to repay the loan outstanding against it at least partly, if not in full. Any such repayment would not attract any statutory or other bar as is being contemplated by the respondents or the learned Amicus Curiae. At any rate the Saharas are ready to move the authorities concerned including the Reserve Bank of India at the appropriate level for a clear cut direction that transfer of money to India pursuant to the transactions mentioned above will not attract any provision of
8 FEMA or the regulations framed thereunder. It was urged that Saharas will not also claim any equity in its favour in the matter of obtaining such clearance or seeking any declaration from the concerned authority nor will it place reliance upon the order passed by this Court to suggest that this Court has either expressly or any necessary implication permitted the funds to be brought into India in the teeth of any legal impediment against such movement. We have given our anxious consideration to the submissions made at the bar. There is no gainsaying that the earlier proposal for sale of the off shore hotel properties mentioned earlier has not materialised. It is unnecessary for us to go into the reasons for the failure of the proposed sale but the fact remains that such sale has not fructified. In the circumstances Saharas could and indeed have come forward with an alternative proposal which as mentioned earlier involves substitution of the Bank of China by another lender and raising of a junior loan. This will according to the Saharas enable them to raise an amount that is sufficient for Saharas to provide the balance 5,000/- crores in cash and arrange for a bank guarantee of an equivalent amount. The transactions so proposed do not involve sale of the off shore properties. They simply involve an additional burden in terms of creation of a second charge on such properties. The proposed
9 transactions have been critically examined by the learned counsel for SEBI and by Mr. Naphade, learned Amicus Curiae appointed by this Court who have not found any fault in this Court allowing the transactions to go through subject to the condition that the amount so raised can be brought into India under the provisions of FEMA and regulations concerned. In the circumstances therefore and keeping in view the submissions made at the Bar as also the safeguards that have been suggested by learned counsel for the parties we see no reason to decline prayers (a) and (b) made in IAs 37 and 39 as extracted in the earleer part of this order. We accordingly allow these applications to that extent but subject to the following conditions: 1) The entire amount raised pursuant to the proposed transactions less processing and other incidental expenses shall be deposited with the Ambey Valley (Mauritius) Limited with a direction from Ambey Vally Ltd., the holding company that the former shall not utilise the same except for the purpose of depositing the amount with SEBI in terms of the orders of this Court. 2) Saharas will approach the Reserve Bank of India at the appropriate level with an appropriate representation to have a suitable clarification issued as to the permissiblity of bringing
10 in the amount that may be transferred into the account of Ambey Valley (Mauritius) Limited in consequence of the transactions permitted by this Court. The representation shall be made within one week from today, upon receipt whereof the competent authority may look into the same and pass an appropriate orders and/or issue clarification in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible but preferably within a period of two weeks from the date the representation is received. Saharas shall furnish to the competent authority all such information and documents as may be demanded by the competent authority in connection with the representation. We leave it open to the competent authority to decide in its discretion whether it would like to afford an opportunity of being heard to Saharas in the matter before issuing any such clarification. (3) In the representation as at (2) above or at any stage in the course of these proceedings or any other proceedings for that matter will not Saharas be entitled to claim any equity on the basis of this order in their favour nor will it be suggested that we have by permitting the proposed transactions presented the government or the competent authority with a fait accompli as regards transfer of the money received pursuant to the proposed transactions to India is concerned. We make it clear that we have neither examined nor expressed any opinion on the question whether
11 the amount raised can be conditionally or unconditionally brought into India which aspect we have left for the competent authority to decide. At the oral prayer made before us by Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, we direct that the facility provided to the contemnors by the jail authorities in terms of our order dated 01.08.2014 as continued from time to time shall be once again provided to the contemnors by the said authorities w.e.f. 12.01.2015 up to 20.02.2015 subject to all such conditions as have been stipulated in those orders. I.As No. 37-39 are disposed off with the above directions. I.A. No. 90-91: Mr. Venugopal is permitted to file an additional affidavit setting out the details of the expenditure under different heads and disbursement thereof as claimed by the SEBI in terms of our order dated 31.08.2012 and 04.06.2014. Saharas shall be free to file a reply to the supplementary affidavit as and when the same is filed. (SHASHI SAREEN) (VEENA KHERA) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER
r\222 1 ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. Nos.31-33, 34-36, 43-44 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 & 413/2012 in C.A. No. 9813/2011 and 9833/2011, I.A. Nos. 90-91 in C.A. No. 9813 of 2011 and 9833/2011 and C.P.(C) No. 260/2013 in C.A. No. 8643 of 2012 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (For appropriate directions and modification/relaxation and Directions and permission to file appln. For direction and office report) with T.C.(C) No. 83 of 2014, 87/2014, 86/2014, 84/2014 and 85/2014 Date: 09/01/2015 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI Mr. Shekhar Naphade,Sr.Adv. (A.C.) Ms. Shubhangi Tuli,Adv. Mr. Vikram Sobti,Adv. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind Datar,Sr.Adv. (SEBI) Mr. Pratap Venugopal,Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman,Adv. Ms. Supriya Jain,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair,Adv. For M/s. K. J. John & Co. For Applicant (s) Mr. S. Ganesh,Sr.Adv. Dr. Rajiv Dhawan,Sr.Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv.Signature Not Verified Mr. Keshav Mohan,Adv. Mr. Aarohi Bhalla,Adv.Digitally signed byShashi SareenDate: 2015.01.1211:31:07 ALMTReason: Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. Ms. Amrita Narayan,Adv. Mr. Sujit Keshri,Adv. Mr. Raghav Ghei, Adv. Mr. P.K.Rao, Adv. 2 Ms.Sujata Kurdukar, Adv.For Respondent(s) Mr. Niraj Sharma, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R I.As. No. 37-39: Taken on Board By our order dated 22.07.2014 we had allowed I.As No. 10-12 of 2014 filed by the contemnors and permitted Saharas totransfer, sell or encumber three offshore hotel properties ownedby them subject to the condition that the entire saleconsideration received by the Saharas after repayment of the loanoutstanding towards the Bank of China is deposited with SEBI incompliance with the directions contained in the conditional bailorder of this Court dated 26.03.2014. We had further directedthat the excess amount, if any, shall be deposited by the Saharasin a separate account to await orders from this Court regardingtheir utilisation and that the sale of offshore properties shallnot be at a price lesser than the value estimated by CBRE and JLLfor the said properties reduced at the most by 5% of such value. Pursuant to the above order Saharas had started negotiationswith the parties willing to purchase the said offshore properties.In the course of the said negotiations a certain "In PrincipleAgreement" was also it appears drawn up but before the deal could 3be finalised difficulties appear to have arisen on account ofadverse publicity and demonstration by a section of the publicagainst the proposed sale of the properties to a particularentity. To cut the long story short the proposed sale of theproperty in terms of the In Principle Agreement has in due coursefallen through leaving no option for the Saharas except toexplore alternative methods of sale/transfer or mortgage of thesaid properties to raise the requisite amount. It is in thatbackdrop that Saharas have filed I.As.No. 37-39 in which amongothers they have sought from this Court the following tworeliefs: a) Grant its permission, whether by Oasis or by someother arty, of Bank of China's loans to Sahara (including the
related securities) and the amendment of the terms and conditionsapplicable to such loans. b) grant its permission for raising of additional juniorloans of up to US$650 million and the creation of subordinatecharges on the said 3 foreign hotel properties (or on Sahara'sshareholding in the relevant hotel owning companies) When these IAs came up for hearing before us on 02.12.2014 wewere informed by M/s. Rajeev Dhawan and S.Ganesh senior advocatesthat in terms of the fresh proposal mooted by Sharas the Bank ofChina's outstanding loan shall be repaid by substituting another 4lender in its place with the permission of this Court. BesidesSharas propose to raise an additional junior loan for a sum of Us640 millions against the offshore properties mentioned above.M/s. Arvind Datar, appearing for SEBI and Shekhar Naphade as anAmicus Curiae had sought some time to examine the proposedtransactions and the documents relating thereto. They had alsoasked for certain further information in regard to certain aspectsbefore they make their submissions. We are told by Mr. Ganeshthat queries raised by the learned counsel opposite have sincebeen answered and explained in writing and that what remains isonly an apprehension expressed by M/s Naphade and Datar regardingthe permissiblity of bringing into India the money that may beraised towards proposed junior loan against the said properties.Mr. Naphade holds the view that no amount borrowed from outsidethe country can be brought into India with a view to repaying anyoutstanding liability. He urged that apart from statutory andother complications in the matter. Sahara may have to seek thepermission of the competent authority in the Reserve Bank ofIndia under the provisions of FEMA and the regulations framedthereunder. On behalf of Saharas it was argued by M/s. Dhawan and Ganeshthat there is a certain amount of urgency in the finalisation ofthe proposed deals by which Bank of China has to exit upon 5
repayment of the loan outstanding towards it, by arranging fundsfrom a new lender introduced as a mortgagee of the properties.They have placed before us a communication dated 05.01.2015addressed by the Bank of America to Sahara India Pariwar interalia stating that under directions from M/s. Mirach Capital GroupLLC an amount of USD 1050 million remains blocked and earmarkedtill February 20, 2015 for the transactions being processedbetween Mirach and Sahara. The letter further states that MirachCapital Group LLC has advised Bank of America to disburse USD 650million out of the said unencumbered funds of USD 1050 million forjunior loan transaction as agreed between Amby Valley (Mauritius)Limited and Mirach Capital Group LLC after the execution ofnecessary legally binding definitive agreements and in accordancewith the terms as mentioned in offer letter dated December 15,2014 issued by Mirach Capital Group LLC and accepted by AmbyValley (Mauritius) Limited. The letter further affirms thatMirach Capital Group LLC has advised Bank of America to disburseUSD 400 million out of the said unencumbered funds of USD 1050million for the purpose of making an investment in SaharaHospitality Limited as per offer letter dated December 15, 2015issued by Mirach Capital Group LLC after the execution ofnecessary investment and ancilliary agreements. What issignificant is that according to the communication aforementioned 6Bank of America is also under instructions from Mirach CapitalGroup LLC to unblock the said funds of USD 1050 million if thejunior loan agreement for USD 650 million and investment agreementwith Sahara Hospitality Limited for USD 400 million is notexecuted by the nd of business on February 20th, 2015. It wasargued that although funds required for finalising the dealbetween the companies aforementioned have been blocked up
toFebruary 20, 2015 keeping in view the huge amount involved and thefact that blocking of the said amount would deprive the partiesconcerned of the beneficial use thereof, there is a great deal ofurgency in finalising the transactions which are bound to takesome time before the same are clinched by February 20, 2015, thedate fixed under the instructions. As regards the apprehension expressed by M/s. Naphade andDatar regarding repatriation of the amount so raised from Americato India for being utilised in the manner directed by this Court,it was argued that the amount in question will first be creditedin the account of Ambey Valley (Mauritius) Limited which is awholly owned subsidiary company of Ambey Vally Limitedincorporated in India. It was also submitted that anyapprehension regarding misutilisation or diversion of those fundscan be allayed by a direction from this Court to the Saharas toissue specific instructions to its subsidiary Ambey Valley 7(Mauritius) Limited not to deal with the said money or utilise thesame in any manner without the permission of this Court. Insofaras the legal impediments arising out of the provisions of FEMA andother related regulations governing transfer of funds from outsideIndia to this country for liquidation of any outstanding liabilityare concerned it was argued that so long as the funds remainparked with Ambey Valley (Mauritius) Limited which is thesubsidiary of Ambey Valley Limited, the funds are secure againstany misdirection or misutilisation. It was submitted thataccording to the petitioner's understanding there was noimpediment in transferring the funds to India as Ambey Valley(Mauritius) Limited owes an amount of USD 540 million towards aloan which Ambey Valley (Mauritius) Limited has borrowed from its100% holding company in the year 2010. The amount available toAmbey Valley (Mauritius) Limited pursuant to the proposedtransactions will enable the said company to repay the loan
outstanding against it at least partly, if not in full. Any suchrepayment would not attract any statutory or other bar as is beingcontemplated by the respondents or the learned Amicus Curiae. Atany rate the Saharas are ready to move the authorities concernedincluding the Reserve Bank of India at the appropriate level fora clear cut direction that transfer of money to India pursuant tothe transactions mentioned above will not attract any provision of 8FEMA or the regulations framed thereunder. It was urged thatSaharas will not also claim any equity in its favour in the matterof obtaining such clearance or seeking any declaration from theconcerned authority nor will it place reliance upon the orderpassed by this Court to suggest that this Court has eitherexpressly or any necessary implication permitted the funds to bebrought into India in the teeth of any legal impediment againstsuch movement. We have given our anxious consideration to the submissionsmade at the bar. There is no gainsaying that the earlier proposalfor sale of the off shore hotel properties mentioned earlier hasnot materialised. It is unnecessary for us to go into the reasonsfor the failure of the proposed sale but the fact remains thatsuch sale has not fructified. In the circumstances Saharas couldand indeed have come forward with an alternative proposal whichas mentioned earlier involves substitution of the Bank of China byanother lender and raising of a junior loan. This will accordingto the Saharas enable them to raise an amount that is sufficientfor Saharas to provide the balance 5,000/- crores in cash andarrange for a bank guarantee of an equivalent amount. Thetransactions so proposed do not involve sale of the off shoreproperties. They simply involve an additional burden in terms ofcreation of a second charge on such properties. The proposed 9transactions have been critically examined by the learned counselfor SEBI and by Mr. Naphade, learned Amicus Curiae appointed bythis Court who have not found any fault in this Court allowing
the transactions to go through subject to the condition that theamount so raised can be brought into India under the provisions ofFEMA and regulations concerned. In the circumstances therefore and keeping in view thesubmissions made at the Bar as also the safeguards that have beensuggested by learned counsel for the parties we see no reason todecline prayers (a) and (b) made in IAs 37 and 39 as extracted inthe earleer part of this order. We accordingly allow theseapplications to that extent but subject to the followingconditions: 1) The entire amount raised pursuant to the proposedtransactions less processing and other incidental expenses shallbe deposited with the Ambey Valley (Mauritius) Limited with adirection from Ambey Vally Ltd., the holding company that theformer shall not utilise the same except for the purpose ofdepositing the amount with SEBI in terms of the orders of thisCourt.2) Saharas will approach the Reserve Bank of India at theappropriate level with an appropriate representation to have asuitable clarification issued as to the permissiblity of bringing 10in the amount that may be transferred into the account of AmbeyValley (Mauritius) Limited in consequence of the transactionspermitted by this Court. The representation shall be made withinone week from today, upon receipt whereof the competent authoritymay look into the same and pass an appropriate orders and/or issueclarification in accordance with law as expeditiously as possiblebut preferably within a period of two weeks from the date therepresentation is received. Saharas shall furnish to the competentauthority all such information and documents as may be demanded bythe competent authority in connection with the representation. Weleave it open to the competent authority to decide in itsdiscretion whether it would like to afford an opportunity of beingheard to Saharas in the matter before issuing any such
clarification. (3) In the representation as at (2) above or at any stage inthe course of these proceedings or any other proceedings for thatmatter will not Saharas be entitled to claim any equity on thebasis of this order in their favour nor will it be suggested thatwe have by permitting the proposed transactions presented thegovernment or the competent authority with a fait accompli asregards transfer of the money received pursuant to the proposedtransactions to India is concerned. We make it clear that we haveneither examined nor expressed any opinion on the question whether 11the amount raised can be conditionally or unconditionally broughtinto India which aspect we have left for the competent authorityto decide. At the oral prayer made before us by Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, wedirect that the facility provided to the contemnors by the jailauthorities in terms of our order dated 01.08.2014 as continuedfrom time to time shall be once again provided to the contemnorsby the said authorities w.e.f. 12.01.2015 up to 20.02.2015 subjectto all such conditions as have been stipulated in those orders.I.As No. 37-39 are disposed off with the above directions. I.A. No. 90-91: Mr. Venugopal is permitted to file an additionalaffidavit setting out the details of the expenditure underdifferent heads and disbursement thereof as claimed by the SEBIin terms of our order dated 31.08.2012 and 04.06.2014. Saharasshall be free to file a reply to the supplementary affidavit asand when the same is filed.(SHASHI SAREEN) (VEENA KHERA) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER
1 ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A.Nos.31-33, 34-36 & 37-39 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 & 413/2012 in C.A. No. 9813/2011 and 9833/2011 and Conmt. Pet. © No.260/2013 in In C.A. No. 8643 of 2012 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (For appropriate directions and modification/relaxation and Directions and office report) Date: 17/12/2014 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI Mr. Shekhar Naphade,Sr.Adv. (A.C.) Ms. Shubhangi Tuli,Adv. Mr. Vikram Sobti,Adv. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind Datar,Sr.Adv. (SEBI) Mr. Pratap Venugopal,Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman,Adv. Ms. Supriya Jain,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair,Adv. For M/s. K. J. John & Co. For Applicant (s) Dr. Rajiv Dhawan,Sr.Adv. Mr. S. Ganesh,Sr.Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan,Adv. Mr. Aarohi Bhalla,Adv. Mr. Jitesh Shrivastava,Adv. Mr. Ayush Chaudhary,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. Ms. Amrita Narayan,Adv. Mr. Sujit Keshrail,Adv. Mr. Prashant Kumar Sharma, Adv. MR.Aditya Chopra, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Rahul Kaushik,Adv. Ms. Anil Katiyara,Adv. Mr. Arijit Prasad,Adv.
2 UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Heard. Mr. S. Ganesh, learned senior counsel appearing for the contemnors has handed over to Mr. P. Venugopal, learned counsel for the SEBI, a cheque for a sum of Rs.77.80 crores representing the entire balance purchase price of the Jodhpur property. In addition, he has also handed over to Mr. Venugopal 21 post-dated cheques payable between 15 th January and 22 nd June, 2015 for a total amount of Rs.1884.96 crores. Mr. Ganesh submits that each one of the purchasers who has issued the post-dated cheques aforementioned has also filed an individual undertaking on affidavit in this Court in terms of the previous order of this Court dated 2 nd December, 2014. He contended that this Court could in the light of the payments already made to SEBI grant permission to Saharas for work on the transfer of the loan outstanding towards Bank of China to Oasis Light Ltd. and suitable amendments of the terms and conditions applicable to those loans. He submitted that permission could also be granted to Saharas to raise a junior loan to the tune of US $ 650 million by creating against the three foreign hotel properties and share-holdings relating thereto. It was urged by Mr. Ganesh, that as suggested by Mr. Shekhar Naphade, learned Amicus appointed by this Court, the Saharas had agreed to shift the escrow account from Nation
3 Wide to Bank of America which has extensive banking operation even in India but any deposit by the junior lenders will be possible only when the Bank of China exits and Oasis is allowed to take over the charge. He urged that this Court could in order to facilitate the deposit in the escrow account by the junior lenders as a first step permit Saharas to allow the Bank of China to exit and Oasis to enter into the proposed arrangement. M/s. Arvind P. Datar, learned senior counsel appearing for the SEBI and Mr. Shekhar Naphade, learned Amicus, on the other hand submitted that certain aspects of the proposed arrangement between Oasis and Bank of China as also the arrangement between the Mirach and Saharas still need to be verified and examined especially as to the amount that will actually become available to SEBI, should the proposed arrangement be sanctioned by this Court. It is also submitted that there may be certain legal impediments in the transfer of the money to be deposited in the escrow account on account of the provisions of FEMA and that the loan proposed to be raised by the Saharas in the manner indicated above may require sanction/permission from the competent authority under the said Act. They submitted that additional queries have to be made to counsel opposite in writing to which Mr. Ganesh offered to send a suitable reply without delay. In the circumstances, therefore, we do not consider it necessary at present to issue any direction on the above subject. We may consider all these aspects only after the queries raised by
4 M/s. Datar and Naphade are satisfactorily answered by Mr. Ganesh in writing. We may only mention in passing that according to Mr. Ganesh ECB regulation to which a brief reference was made by Mr. Datar, does not have any application to the transaction. We do not however propose to make any observation regarding the merits of the rival contentions at this stage. M/s. Datar and Naphade are permitted to seek any further clarification on any issues or aspect considered relevant by them to which Mr.Ganesh may present a suitable reply within a week from the date he receives such queries. Mr. Datar at this stage submitted that the SEBI has out of the deposited amount disbursed a sum of Rs. 2,00,00,000/- (Rupees Two Crores only) but it has also sought permission in IAs. No. 92 and 93 of 2014 to pay up multiple deposits made by several others who have claimed such deposits some of which have been found to be genuine on verification. He urged that at one stage of these proceedings this Court had not allowed the reimbursement to multiple depositors. It was urged by Mr. Datar that the SEBI has verified as at present 2781 applications from multiple deposit holders and the reimbursement if permitted would led an outflow of Rs. 28.1 crores only. He submits that the Income-Tax Authorities could be left free to take such action as may be permissible in law against the depositors or Saharas who have received such multiple deposits. But there is no reason why the multiple depositors who have made their deposits which depositors
5 have been found to be genuine on verification should not be reimbursed. Mr. Ganesh, learned counsel submits that there should be no difficulty in permitting the SEBI to reimburse the depositors whether multiple or otherwise. We accordingly allow these IAs No. 37-39 and permit SEBI to reimburse the amount of deposit with interest accrued on the same to all such depositors as have made multiple deposits upon due and proper verification about the genuineness of the deposits. Post on 09.01.2015 at 2.00 P.M along with I.As No. 90-91 and I.A. No.... of 2014 (Appln. for direction) filed by Mr. Niraj Sharma, Adv. Appeals No. 42 of 2013, 48 of 2013, 49 of 2013, 50 and 2013 and W.P. © No. 2088 of 2013 shall also be listed on 09.01.2015 which has been transferred from the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad vide this Court's order dated 17.07.2013. (Shashi Sareen) (VEENA KHERA) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER
˜E 1 ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A.Nos.31-33, 34-36 & 37-39 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 & 413/2012 in C.A. No. 9813/2011 and 9833/2011 and Conmt. Pet. ) No.260/2013 in In C.A. No. 8643 of 2012 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (For appropriate directions and modification/relaxation and Directions and office report) Date: 17/12/2014 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI Mr. Shekhar Naphade,Sr.Adv. (A.C.) Ms. Shubhangi Tuli,Adv. Mr. Vikram Sobti,Adv. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind Datar,Sr.Adv. (SEBI) Mr. Pratap Venugopal,Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman,Adv. Ms. Supriya Jain,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair,Adv. For M/s. K. J. John & Co. For Applicant (s) Dr. Rajiv Dhawan,Sr.Adv. Mr. S. Ganesh,Sr.Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan,Adv. Mr. Aarohi Bhalla,Adv. Mr. Jitesh Shrivastava,Adv. Mr. Ayush Chaudhary,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. Ms. Amrita Narayan,Adv. Mr. Sujit Keshrail,Adv.Signature Not Verified Mr. Prashant Kumar Sharma, Adv. MR.Aditya Chopra, Adv.Digitally signed byShashi SareenDate: 2014.12.1909:34:53 ALMTReason: For Respondent(s) Mr. Rahul Kaushik,Adv. Ms. Anil Katiyara,Adv. Mr. Arijit Prasad,Adv. 2 UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R
Heard. Mr. S. Ganesh, learned senior counsel appearing for thecontemnors has handed over to Mr. P. Venugopal, learned counselfor the SEBI, a cheque for a sum of Rs.77.80 crores representingthe entire balance purchase price of the Jodhpur property. Inaddition, he has also handed over to Mr. Venugopal 21 post-datedcheques payable between 15th January and 22nd June, 2015 for a totalamount of Rs.1884.96 crores. Mr. Ganesh submits that each one ofthe purchasers who has issued the post-dated chequesaforementioned has also filed an individual undertaking onaffidavit in this Court in terms of the previous order of thisCourt dated 2nd December, 2014. He contended that this Court couldin the light of the payments already made to SEBI grant permissionto Saharas for work on the transfer of the loan outstandingtowards Bank of China to Oasis Light Ltd. and suitable amendmentsof the terms and conditions applicable to those loans. Hesubmitted that permission could also be granted to Saharas toraise a junior loan to the tune of US $ 650 million by creatingagainst the three foreign hotel properties and share-holdingsrelating thereto. It was urged by Mr. Ganesh, that as suggestedby Mr. Shekhar Naphade, learned Amicus appointed by this Court,the Saharas had agreed to shift the escrow account from Nation 3Wide to Bank of America which has extensive banking operationeven in India but any deposit by the junior lenders will bepossible only when the Bank of China exits and Oasis is allowed totake over the charge. He urged that this Court could in order tofacilitate the deposit in the escrow account by the junior lendersas a first step permit Saharas to allow the Bank of China to exitand Oasis to enter into the proposed arrangement. M/s. Arvind P. Datar, learned senior counsel appearing forthe SEBI and Mr. Shekhar Naphade, learned Amicus, on the otherhand submitted that certain aspects of the proposed arrangementbetween Oasis and Bank of China as also the arrangement between
the Mirach and Saharas still need to be verified and examinedespecially as to the amount that will actually become availableto SEBI, should the proposed arrangement be sanctioned by thisCourt. It is also submitted that there may be certain legalimpediments in the transfer of the money to be deposited in theescrow account on account of the provisions of FEMA and that theloan proposed to be raised by the Saharas in the manner indicatedabove may require sanction/permission from the competent authorityunder the said Act. They submitted that additional queries haveto be made to counsel opposite in writing to which Mr. Ganeshoffered to send a suitable reply without delay. In the circumstances, therefore, we do not consider itnecessary at present to issue any direction on the above subject.We may consider all these aspects only after the queries raised by 4M/s. Datar and Naphade are satisfactorily answered by Mr. Ganeshin writing. We may only mention in passing that according to Mr.Ganesh ECB regulation to which a brief reference was made by Mr.Datar, does not have any application to the transaction. We donot however propose to make any observation regarding the meritsof the rival contentions at this stage. M/s. Datar and Naphadeare permitted to seek any further clarification on any issues oraspect considered relevant by them to which Mr.Ganesh may presenta suitable reply within a week from the date he receives suchqueries. Mr. Datar at this stage submitted that the SEBI has outof the deposited amount disbursed a sum of Rs. 2,00,00,000/-(Rupees Two Crores only) but it has also sought permission in IAs.No. 92 and 93 of 2014 to pay up multiple deposits made by severalothers who have claimed such deposits some of which have beenfound to be genuine on verification. He urged that at one stageof these proceedings this Court had not allowed the reimbursementto multiple depositors. It was urged by Mr. Datar that the SEBIhas verified as at present 2781 applications from multiple depositholders and the reimbursement if permitted would led an outflow
of Rs. 28.1 crores only. He submits that the Income-TaxAuthorities could be left free to take such action as may bepermissible in law against the depositors or Saharas who havereceived such multiple deposits. But there is no reason why themultiple depositors who have made their deposits which depositors 5have been found to be genuine on verification should not bereimbursed. Mr. Ganesh, learned counsel submits that there should be nodifficulty in permitting the SEBI to reimburse the depositorswhether multiple or otherwise. We accordingly allow these IAs No. 37-39 and permit SEBI toreimburse the amount of deposit with interest accrued on the sameto all such depositors as have made multiple deposits upon dueand proper verification about the genuineness of the deposits. Post on 09.01.2015 at 2.00 P.M along with I.As No. 90-91and I.A. No.... of 2014 (Appln. for direction) filed by Mr. NirajSharma, Adv. Appeals No. 42 of 2013, 48 of 2013, 49 of 2013, 50 and 2013and W.P. ) No. 2088 of 2013 shall also be listed on 09.01.2015which has been transferred from the High Court of Judicature atAllahabad vide this Court's order dated 17.07.2013.(Shashi Sareen) (VEENA KHERA) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER
˜E 1 ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A.Nos.31-33, 34-36 & 37-39 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 & 413/2012 in C.A. No. 9813/2011 and 9833/2011 and Conmt. Pet. ) No.260/2013 in In C.A. No. 8643 of 2012 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (For appropriate directions and modification/relaxation and Directions and office report) Date: 17/12/2014 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI Mr. Shekhar Naphade,Sr.Adv. (A.C.) Ms. Shubhangi Tuli,Adv. Mr. Vikram Sobti,Adv. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind Datar,Sr.Adv. (SEBI) Mr. Pratap Venugopal,Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman,Adv. Ms. Supriya Jain,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair,Adv. For M/s. K. J. John & Co. For Applicant (s) Dr. Rajiv Dhawan,Sr.Adv. Mr. S. Ganesh,Sr.Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan,Adv. Mr. Aarohi Bhalla,Adv. Mr. Jitesh Shrivastava,Adv. Mr. Ayush Chaudhary,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. Ms. Amrita Narayan,Adv. Mr. Sujit Keshrail,Adv.Signature Not Verified Mr. Prashant Kumar Sharma, Adv. MR.Aditya Chopra, Adv.Digitally signed byShashi SareenDate: 2014.12.1909:34:53 ALMTReason: For Respondent(s) Mr. Rahul Kaushik,Adv. Ms. Anil Katiyara,Adv. Mr. Arijit Prasad,Adv. 2 UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R
Heard. Mr. S. Ganesh, learned senior counsel appearing for thecontemnors has handed over to Mr. P. Venugopal, learned counselfor the SEBI, a cheque for a sum of Rs.77.80 crores representingthe entire balance purchase price of the Jodhpur property. Inaddition, he has also handed over to Mr. Venugopal 21 post-datedcheques payable between 15th January and 22nd June, 2015 for a totalamount of Rs.1884.96 crores. Mr. Ganesh submits that each one ofthe purchasers who has issued the post-dated chequesaforementioned has also filed an individual undertaking onaffidavit in this Court in terms of the previous order of thisCourt dated 2nd December, 2014. He contended that this Court couldin the light of the payments already made to SEBI grant permissionto Saharas for work on the transfer of the loan outstandingtowards Bank of China to Oasis Light Ltd. and suitable amendmentsof the terms and conditions applicable to those loans. Hesubmitted that permission could also be granted to Saharas toraise a junior loan to the tune of US $ 650 million by creatingagainst the three foreign hotel properties and share-holdingsrelating thereto. It was urged by Mr. Ganesh, that as suggestedby Mr. Shekhar Naphade, learned Amicus appointed by this Court,the Saharas had agreed to shift the escrow account from Nation 3Wide to Bank of America which has extensive banking operationeven in India but any deposit by the junior lenders will bepossible only when the Bank of China exits and Oasis is allowed totake over the charge. He urged that this Court could in order tofacilitate the deposit in the escrow account by the junior lendersas a first step permit Saharas to allow the Bank of China to exitand Oasis to enter into the proposed arrangement. M/s. Arvind P. Datar, learned senior counsel appearing forthe SEBI and Mr. Shekhar Naphade, learned Amicus, on the otherhand submitted that certain aspects of the proposed arrangementbetween Oasis and Bank of China as also the arrangement between
the Mirach and Saharas still need to be verified and examinedespecially as to the amount that will actually become availableto SEBI, should the proposed arrangement be sanctioned by thisCourt. It is also submitted that there may be certain legalimpediments in the transfer of the money to be deposited in theescrow account on account of the provisions of FEMA and that theloan proposed to be raised by the Saharas in the manner indicatedabove may require sanction/permission from the competent authorityunder the said Act. They submitted that additional queries haveto be made to counsel opposite in writing to which Mr. Ganeshoffered to send a suitable reply without delay. In the circumstances, therefore, we do not consider itnecessary at present to issue any direction on the above subject.We may consider all these aspects only after the queries raised by 4M/s. Datar and Naphade are satisfactorily answered by Mr. Ganeshin writing. We may only mention in passing that according to Mr.Ganesh ECB regulation to which a brief reference was made by Mr.Datar, does not have any application to the transaction. We donot however propose to make any observation regarding the meritsof the rival contentions at this stage. M/s. Datar and Naphadeare permitted to seek any further clarification on any issues oraspect considered relevant by them to which Mr.Ganesh may presenta suitable reply within a week from the date he receives suchqueries. Mr. Datar at this stage submitted that the SEBI has outof the deposited amount disbursed a sum of Rs. 2,00,00,000/-(Rupees Two Crores only) but it has also sought permission in IAs.No. 92 and 93 of 2014 to pay up multiple deposits made by severalothers who have claimed such deposits some of which have beenfound to be genuine on verification. He urged that at one stageof these proceedings this Court had not allowed the reimbursementto multiple depositors. It was urged by Mr. Datar that the SEBIhas verified as at present 2781 applications from multiple depositholders and the reimbursement if permitted would led an outflow
of Rs. 28.1 crores only. He submits that the Income-TaxAuthorities could be left free to take such action as may bepermissible in law against the depositors or Saharas who havereceived such multiple deposits. But there is no reason why themultiple depositors who have made their deposits which depositors 5have been found to be genuine on verification should not bereimbursed. Mr. Ganesh, learned counsel submits that there should be nodifficulty in permitting the SEBI to reimburse the depositorswhether multiple or otherwise. We accordingly allow these IAs No. 37-39 and permit SEBI toreimburse the amount of deposit with interest accrued on the sameto all such depositors as have made multiple deposits upon dueand proper verification about the genuineness of the deposits. Post on 09.01.2015 at 2.00 P.M along with I.As No. 90-91and I.A. No.... of 2014 (Appln. for direction) filed by Mr. NirajSharma, Adv. Appeals No. 42 of 2013, 48 of 2013, 49 of 2013, 50 and 2013and W.P. ) No. 2088 of 2013 shall also be listed on 09.01.2015which has been transferred from the High Court of Judicature atAllahabad vide this Court's order dated 17.07.2013.(Shashi Sareen) (VEENA KHERA) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER
1 ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A.Nos.31-33, 34-36 & 37-39 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 & 413/2012 in C.A. No. 9813/2011 and 9833/2011 and Conmt. Pet. © No.260/2013 in In C.A. No. 8643 of 2012 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (For appropriate directions and modification/relaxation and Directions and office report) Date: 02/12/2014 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI Mr. Shekhar Naphade,Sr.Adv. (A.C.) Ms. Shubhangi Tuli,Adv. Mr. Vikram Sobti,Adv. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind Datar,Sr.Adv. (SEBI) Mr. Pratap Venugopal,Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman,Adv. Ms. Supriya Jain,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair,Adv. Ms. Niharika,Adv. For M/s. K. J. John & Co. For Applicant (s) Dr. Rajiv Dhawan,Sr.Adv. Mr. S. Ganesh,Sr.Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan,Adv. Mr. Arohi Bhalla,Adv. Mr. Jitesh Shrivastava,Adv. Mr. Ayush Chaudhary,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. Ms. Amrita Narayan,Adv. Mr. Sujit Keshrail,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Tushar Mehta,ASG Mr. Rahul Kaushik,Adv. Ms. Anil Katiyara,Adv. Mr. Arijit Prasad,Adv.
2 UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Heard. In these applications (I.A.Nos.37-39) filed by Saharas, the applicants have made the following prayers: “ (a) grant its permission, whether by Oasis or by some other party, of Bank of China's loans to Sahara (including the related securities) and the amendment of the terms and conditions applicable to such loans; (b) grant its permission for raising of additional “junior” loans of up to US$650 million and the creation of subordinate charges on the said 3 foreign hotel properties (or on Sahara's shareholding in the relevant hotel owning companies); (c) grant its permission for the sale of the Chauma for the sale prices and in accordance with the payment scheduled stated in the Table in para 15 hereinabove; (d) direct that out of the Petitioners' deposit the amount of Rs.226.96 crores in the Sahara SEBI Refund A/c in terms of para 18 hereinabove and also hand over the cheques issued by the buyers of the domestic immovable properties of an aggregate amount of Rs.2146.25 crores (net off the transaction costs, taxes, incidental expenses etc.) in terms of para 16 hereinabove; and (e) pass such further or other orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case” M/s. Rajiv Dhawan and S. Ganesh, learned senior counsel appearing for the applicants, submit that the applicants have already negotiated suitable deals for the sale of the properties at Chauma (Gurgaon), Jodhpur, Vasai (Mumbai) and Pune. Agreements to sell in relation to the sale of the said properties have also been executed with the prospective buyers except the Pune
3 property. It is further submitted that in regard to three properties at Chauma, Jodhpur and Vasai, the applicants-sellers have received a down payment of Rs.184.50 crores while the balance out of the total consideration is payable to the applicants-sellers by May 2015. According to Mr. Ganesh, the purchasers of the properties in-question have already issued post-dated cheques covering the sale consideration less the transaction costs, taxes and incidental expenses. These cheques have been issued in favour of “Sahara SEBI Refund A/c” copies whereof have been enclosed with these applications. It is urged that while the property situated at Jodhpur and Vasai are within 5% margin of the estimated value of the said properties in terms of our previous order dated 4 th June, 2014, the property situated at Chauma is about 15% below the estimated value of the property. The sale consideration in regard to all the three properties at the places, indicated above, is however many times more than the circle rates fixed for those areas. It is submitted that this Court could permit the sale of the property at Chauma at the price settled in terms of the agreements to sell in relation to the said property in relaxation of the condition earlier imposed by this Court that the properties shall not be sold at a price below 5% of the estimated value without the permission of this Court. Mr. Arvind P. Datar and Mr. Pratap Venugopal, learned counsel appearing for SEBI, have no objection to the sale of the three properties at Chauma, Jodhpur and Vasai on the terms stipulated in the agreements to sell, executed between the sellers-applicants herein and the purchasers of the said properties especially when
4 the purchasers have agreed to furnish undertakings to this Court that the post-dated cheques issued by them pursuant to the said agreements to sell, shall be honoured on the due dates. In the circumstances, therefore, we direct deposit of a sum of Rs.184.50 crores already received by the sellers-applicants with the “Sahara SEBI Refund A/c”. Mr. Ganesh has handed over to Mr. Pratap Venugopal, counsel appearing for the SEBI, in the Court today three demand drafts and a cheque, totalling Rs.184.50 crores. We direct that the proposed sale of the properties at Chauma, Jodhpur and Vasai shall be subject to the terms of the agreements to sell copies, whereof have been filed by the applicants, and also that the purchasers of the said properties shall file in this Court specific individual undertakings to the effect that the post-dated cheques issued by them shall be honoured on the due dates. As regards to Pune property, Dr. Dhawan and Mr. Ganesh argued that the properties to which the applicants have agreed to sell is for a sum of Rs.550 crores which is within 5% margins fixed by our order dated 4 th June, 2014. They submit that the agreement is being finalised with the purchaser and upon execution of the agreement a down payment of Rs.50 crores received from the purchasers, shall also be deposited with the SEBI in the “Sahara SEBI Refund A/c” and the balance amount of consideration deposited within six weeks thereafter, subject of course to deduction of transaction costs, taxes and other statutory dues. We, in that view, permit the applicants to proceed with the finalisation of the sale of the Pune property also on the above condition.
5 That leave us with the proposed payment of the Bank of China's outstanding loan amount and substitution of another lender in place of Bank of China and also permission to take additional junior loans to a tune of US $ 650 million. M/s. Arvind P. Datar and Mr. Shekhar Naphade, learned amicus, argued that the terms and conditions on which the substitution may take place & the escrow account is being opened and operated as also deductions that may be made on account of junior loans of US $ 650 million in the second loan, are not very clear from the documents furnished to them by the applicants. They submitted that certain further information in regard to these aspects and other related matters may be required, before the respondents make their submissions to the proposals now floated by the applicants. M/s. Dhawan and Ganesh have no objection to the requisite information being furnished to counsel opposite. In that view, we leave it open to M/s. Datar and Naphade to indicate in writing the information they would require from the applicants whereupon the applicants are expected to furnish the same within a period of one week. These applications shall accordingly stand adjourned by two weeks to be listed again on Wednesday, the 17 th December, 2014 at 2 P.M. (MAHABIR SINGH) (VEENA KHERA) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER
0] 1 ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.3 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A.Nos.13-15/2014 in CONMT.PET.(C) No.412/2012 and 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 and C.A. No. 9833/2011 and Conmt. Pet.(C) No.260/2013 in C.A. No.8643 of 2012) S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (With Appln. On behalf of three detenues U/o XLVII, Rule 6 of the Supreme Court Rules 1966 for shifting from Barrack No.3 to outhouse in the Tihar Jail Premises at Tihar Jail, Delhi for having effective negotiations with prospective buyers/lenders) Date: 01/08/2014 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P. Datar,Sr.Adv. (SEBI) Mr. Pratap Venugopal,Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman,Adv. Mr. Purushottam Kumar Jha,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair,Adv. Ms. Niharika,Adv. Ms. Meenakshi Chauhan,Adv. For M/s. K. J. John & Co. Mr. Shekhar Naphade,Sr.Adv. (A.C.) Ms. Shubhangi Tuli,Adv. Mr. Vikram Sobti,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Ranjit Kumar,S.G. Mr. D.S. Mahra,Adv. Mr. B.V.Balaram Das,Adv. Mr. Tushar Mehta,ASGSignature Not Verified Mr. Arijit Prasad,Adv. Ms. Anil Katiyar,Adv.Digitally signed byMahabir SinghDate: 2014.08.0119:00:35 ISTReason: For Applicant (s) Mr. Harish N. Salve,Sr.Adv. Mr. K.T.S. Tulsi,Sr.Adv. Mr. S. Ganesh,Sr.Adv. 2 Mr. Gaurav Bhatia,Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. Ms. Arohi Bhatia,Adv. Mr. S. Seth,Adv. Mr. Raj Kamal,Adv. Mr. Kuber Boddh,Adv.
Mr. Rajat Singh,Adv. Mr. Antaryami Upadhyay,Adv. Mr. Jatin P.,Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. Ms. Shally Bhasin,Adv. Ms. Sadapaurna Mukherjee,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Heard. The contemnors stand committed to jail by our order dated 4thMarch, 2014 on account of their failure to comply with thedirections of this Court in terms of orders dated 31st August,2012 and 5th December, 2012 and those issued on 25th February,2013 in Civil Appeal No.9813 of 2011. By an order dated 26thMarch, 2014, the contemnors were granted interim bail subject totheir depositing a sum of rupees ten thousand crores, out of whichrupees five thousand crores had to be deposited in cash while thebalance had to be secured by a bank guarantee from a nationalisedbank in favour of Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI).By yet another order dated 4th June, 2014, this Court had liftedthe embargo placed by an earlier order upon the operation of thebank accounts and sales/transfer of immovable assets held bySahara Group of Companies qua nine properties referred to in thesaid order. Sahara Group have, ever since the above orders,deposited an amount of rupees three thousand crores approximatelyby sale/encashment of FDs, Bonds and Securities and by sale of oneof the nine items of property permitted to be sold. 3 By our order dated 22nd July, 2014, we had allowed Saharas totransfer, sell or encumber three Offshore hotel properties ownedby them subject to the conditions that the entire saleconsideration received by the Saharas after repayment of the loanoutstanding towards the Bank of China is deposited with SEBItowards compliance with the directions contained in theconditional bail order dated 26th March, 2014. The prayer made bythe contemnors for parole to enable them to negotiate deals inconnection with the sale of the offshore properties was howeverdeclined on the ground that there was no concrete proposal at thatstage to justify any such concession in favour of the contemnors.We had all the same made it clear that if and when the occasionarises and negotiations appear to be essentially for sale of theproperties, Saharas could approach this Court for appropriateorders. The present applications have now been filed by thecontemnors seeking the following directions:(a) Shifting of Applicants from Barrack No.3 to the 'Outhouse inthe Tihar Jail Premises' at Tihar Jail, Delhi;(b) Allow three secretarial persons for full 24 hours to assistthe applicants along with the office equipments as mentioned inpara in finalizing the negotiations, quickly; and(c) pass such other or further order or orders or such directionsas this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and
circumstances of the case and to meet the ends of justice. When these applications came up before us on 25th July, 2014,Mr. Ranjit Kumar, learned Solicitor General, was requested toappear on behalf of Government of National Capital Territory of 4Delhi and to examine and place on record options consideredfeasible for purposes of facilitating negotiations which thecontemnors may like to conduct with the parties interested inpurchasing their properties situated within and outside thecountry. Pursuant to the said direction, Mr. Ranjit Kumar filed anaffidavit on 30th July, 2014 sworn by Supdt., Tihar Jail No.3,indicating two clear "Options". One of these Options was acceptedto M/s. Harish N.Salve and K.T.S. Tulsi, appearing for thecontemnors, subject to certain further directions on the subjecttouching the "visiting hours" to be specified by this Courtkeeping in view the time-difference between India and the UnitedStates of America where some of the interested parties may belocated. At the request of Mr. Salve, the matter was adjourned toenable the learned counsel for the parties to present a mutuallyacceptable mechanism for making "Option-I", suggested in theaffidavit, workable. When the matter came up today before us Mr. Salve presentedto us a proposal indicating the minimal requirements that alonecan according to him provide a viable mechanism for facilitatingnegotiations with the prospective buyers. According to the saidproposal, the contemnors need to be lodged at the premises,mentioned in "Option-I" of the affidavit dated 30th July, 2014filed by the Superintendent of the Central Jail, No.3, Tihar, NewDelhi, for twenty days, including Sundays and holidays rather thanmoved to and fro for video conference from their barracks. Inaddition, the proposal requires the following five items to beprovided to the contemnors:1. Video Conferencing System and Internet/WI-FI connection.2. One Telephone line with STD/ISD Facility and one Mobile Phone3. Two Desktop computers with Printer and stationary. 54. Two Laptops5. 2-Secretarial, 1-Technician/Operator and 1-office staff It was submitted by Mr. Salve that although it is notnecessary that the premises, mentioned in "Option-I", should bedeclared as a jail, yet there should not be any difficulty in thecompetent authority issuing an appropriate notification to thateffect. Mr. Ranjit Kumar submitted in reply that a notificationwill be necessary as the contemnors have been committed tojudicial custody and they can be validly held in the said premisesaforementioned only if it is declared as a jail. He, however, hadno serious objection to the premises, mentioned in "Option-I" ofthe said affidavit to be declared as a jail by the competentauthority by the 4th of August, 2014. We must add to the credit
of Mr. Kumar that he had no objection even regarding thefacilities, indicated by the contemnors and extracted above, to beallowed to the contemnors. Mr. Ranjit Kumar submitted that videoconferencing system and internet/Wi-Fi connection facility alreadyexists in the conference room comprising "Option-I" of theaffidavit, which could be used by the contemnors at their ownexpenses. Insofar as a telephone line with STD/ISD facility, amobile phone, two desktop computers with printer and stationary,two laptops are concerned, the Jail Authorities, would accordingto Mr. Kumar, permit the same to be brought into the premisescomprising "Option-I", subject to suitable check and verificationfrom the security angle. There is no difficulty even in permitting two secretarialstaff and one technician/operator (total three in number) to beallowed in the premises from 6 a.m. to 8 p.m. initially for aperiod of ten working days commencing 5th August, 2014, subject tothe condition that the names, particulars and addresses of suchstaff are furnished to the Jail Authorities, Superintendent of the 6Central Jail, No.3, Tihar, New Delhi by 10 am tomorrow so that theJail Authorities are in a position to verify their antecedents andother credentials, if so advised. In the circumstances, therefore, we allow these applicationsbut only to the extent indicated above. We make it clear thatthis arrangement is limited to a period of ten working dayscommencing 5th August, 2014 to enable the contemnors to negotiatesale of the properties within and outside the country during thisperiod and shall not constitute a precedent in future. We alsomake it clear that rules, regulations, procedures in regard tovisitors/visiting hours shall continue to be applicable during theperiod the contemnors are lodged in premises, mentioned in"Option-I" in the affidavit dated 30th July, 2014. We further makeit clear that all other conditions stipulated in the affidavitdated 30th July, 2014 shall also continue to remain applicable.(MAHABIR SINGH) (VEENA KHERA) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER
ê# 1 ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.3 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A.Nos.13-15/2014 in CONMT.PET.(C) No.412/2012 and 413/2012 In C.A. No. 9813/2011 and C.A. No. 9833/2011 and Conmt. Pet.(C) No.260/2013 in C.A. No.8643 of 2012) S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (With Appln. On behalf of three detenues U/o XLVII, Rule 6 of the Supreme Court Rules 1966 for shifting from Barrack No.3 to outhouse in the Tihar Jail Premises at Tihar Jail, Delhi for having effective negotiations with prospective buyers/lenders) Date: 30/07/2014 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Pratap Venugopal,Adv. (SEBI) Ms. Surekha Raman,Adv. Ms. Meenakshi Chauhan,Adv. Mr. Purushottam Kumar Jha,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair,Adv. Ms. Niharika,Adv. For M/s. K. J. John & Co. For Respondent(s) Mr. Ranjit Kumar,S.G. Mr. D.S. Mahra,Adv. Mr. B.V.Balaram Das,Adv. For Applicant (s) Mr. Harish N. Salve,Sr.Adv. Mr. K.T.S. Tulsi,Sr.Adv. Mr. S. Ganesh,Sr.Adv. Mr. Gaurav Bhatia,Adv.Signature Not Verified Ms. Arohi Bhatia,Adv.Digitally signed byMahabir SinghDate: 2014.07.31 Mr. S. Seth,Adv. Mr. Raj Kamal,Adv.16:35:55 ISTReason: Mr. Kuber Boddh,Adv. Mr. Rajat Singh,Adv. Mr. Antaryami Upadhyay,Adv. 2 Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. Mr. Jatin P.,Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Heard. Pursuant to our order dated 25th July, 2014, Mr. Ranjit Kumar,learned Solicitor General of India, has filed an affidavit swornby Superintendent of the Central Jail, No.3, Tihar, New Delhi,setting out two "Options" which could be considered to facilitateeffective negotiations between the contemnors on the one side andprospective buyers/lenders on the other in connection with theproposed sale of property owned by Sahara. M/s. Harish N. Salveand Mr. K.T.S. Tulsi, learned senior counsel appearing for thecontemnors submit that "Option-I", set out in para '3' of theaffidavit, is acceptable to his clients and would suffice, subjectto certain further directions on the subject including directionstouching the "visiting hours" to be specified by this Courtkeeping in view the time-difference between India and the UnitedStates of America. Mr. Salve further suggests that the modalitiesincluding the number of secretarial staff, electronicequipments/gadgets, telecommunication etc. could be mutuallysorted out by them with the help of the Jail Authorities and aviable proposal, acceptable to both the sides, presented to thisCourt on Friday, the 1st August, 2014. We accordingly adjourn these applications (I.A.Nos.13-15 of2014) be listed again on Friday, the 1 st August, 2014 at 2 p.m.before this Bench. 3 We expect the parties to work on "Option-I" and other relatedissues, referred to above, and as far as possible present a viableproposition acceptable to the contemnors and the Jail Authorities.(MAHABIR SINGH) (VEENA KHERA) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER
P 1 ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.3 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. Nos. 13-15 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 and 413/2012 in C.A. No. 9813/2011 and 9833/2011 and Contempt Petition ) No. 260/2013 in C.A. No. 8643/2012 SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS S.E.B.I. Respondent(s) (Appln. On behalf of three detenues u/o XLVII, Rule 6 of the Supreme Court Rules, 1966 for shifting from barrack No. 3 to outhouse in the Tihar jail premises at Tihar Jail, Delhi for having effective negotiations with respective buyers/lenders) Date : 25/07/2014 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI For Applicant/ Mr. KTS.Tulsi, Sr. Adv. Petitioner(s) Mr. Gaurav Bhatia, adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Raj Kamal, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Ranjit Kumar, SG Mr. D.S.Mahra, Adv. Mr. B.V.Balram Das, Adv. Mr. Pratep Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Aadv. Ms. Meenakshi Chauhan, adv. Mr. P.K.Jha, Adv. Mr. Anuj Sarma, Adv.Signature Not Verified Mr. Gaurav Nair, Adv.Digitally signed by MS. Niharika, Adv.Shashi SareenDate: 2014.07.2510:43:28 ALMT M/s. K. J. John & Co. ,Adv.Reason: Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. A.Bhalla, Adv. 2 Ms.Shally Bhasin Maheshwari, Adv. Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R
Issue notice to respondent. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. accepts notice.Notice shall also issue to the Secretary, HomeDepartment, Government of NCT of Delhi. At our request, Mr. Ranjit Kumar, learned SolicitorGeneral of India has appeared on behalf of Government ofNCT of Delhi. He seeks a short adjournment to respondto the application and the prayer made therein andindicate the options considered feasible for purposes offacilitating negotiations which the contemnors wouldlike to conduct with the parties interested inpurchasing their properties situated within and outsidethe country. Post on 30.07.2014 at 2.00 P.M. (Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) Court Master Court Master
¨ ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.3 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. Nos. 8-9 & 10-12/2014 in CONMT.PET.(C) No. 412/2012 in C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (for release on parole and directions and office report) with I.A. Nos. 8-9 & 10-12 in Conmt. Pet. (C) No. 413/2012 in C.A. No. 9833/2011 (for release on parole and directions and office report) I.A. Nos. 10-12 in Conmt. Pet. (C) No. 260/2013 in C.A. No. 8643/2012 (Appln. On behalf of Sahara India Real Estate Corporation Limited and Sahara Housing Investment Corporation Limited for appropriate directions in furtherance inter alia of paragraphs 14,22 and 23(IV) of this Hon'ble Court's Order of June 4,2014) Date : 04/07/2014 These applications were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Meenakshi Chauhan, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair, Adv. Mr. P. K. Jha, Adv. Mr. Anuj Sarma, Adv. For M/s. K. J. John & Co. Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh ,Adv. Mr. Tushar Mehta, ASG Mr. Arijit Prasad, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar, Adv.Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed byNeeta SapraDate: 2014.07.1206:03:27 ISTReason: For Respondent(s) Mr. Rajiv Dhavan, Sr. Adv. Mr. S. Ganesh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv. 1 Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Sudeep Seth, Adv. Mr. Jatin, Adv. Mr. Aarohi Bhalla, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Bhatia, Adv. Mrs. Shally Bhasin Maheshwari ,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal ,Adv.
Mr. Gautam Awasthi ,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Hearing concluded. Judgment reserved in all the above Interlocutory Applications. Application for impleadment filed by the Income Tax Departmentis taken on Board. Mr. Tushar Mehta, Additional Solicitor General appearing forthe applicant-Income Tax Department, prays for and is granted twoweeks' time to file an additional affidavit furnishing betterparticulars including details of the assessments already madeagainst the two Sahara companies, action if any already takenagainst the said companies by the Income Tax Authorities andaction if any that the Authorities propose to take. Copies of theorders made so far shall also be enclosed with the affidavit withan advance copy to the parties opposite who shall be free torespond to the same. The affidavit may also indicate whether anyappeals have been filed against the assessment orders passed sofar and if so the status of those appeals. Post after three weeks.(MAHABIR SINGH) (MEENAKSHI KOHLI) (VEENA KHERA) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER COURT MASTER 2
¬ ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.3 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. Nos. 8-9 & 10-12 in Contempt Petition(s)(Civil) No. 412/2012 in C.A. No. 9813/2011 S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s) (For release on parole and directions and office report) With I.A. Nos. 8-9 & 10-12 in Contempt Petition (C) No. 413/2012 in C.A. No. 9833/2011. (For release on parole and directions and office report) Date : 03/07/2014 These I.As were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Ms. Meenakshi Chauhan, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair, Adv. Mr. Purushottam Jha, Adv. Mr. Anuj Sarma, Adv. For M/s. K. J. John & Co. Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh ,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Rajiv Dhavan, Sr. Adv. Mr. S. Ganesh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Sudeep Seth, Adv. Mr. Jatin, Adv. Mr. Aarohi Bhalla, Adv. Mrs. Shally Bhasin Maheshwari ,Adv.Signature Not Verified Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal ,Adv.Digitally signed by Mr. Gautam Awasthi ,Adv.Meenakshi KohliDate: 2014.07.0311:45:48 ISTReason: Mr. Arijit Prasad, Adv. Mr. Anil Katiyar, Adv. 1 UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Heard in part. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, learned counsel for the petitioner wouldfile his objections to I.A. Nos. 8-12 by tomorrow.
List these I.As. on 04.07.2014 at 2 pm for continuation.(MEENAKSHI KOHLI) (VEENA KHERA) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER 2
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION I.A. NOs. 101-103 IN CONTEMPT PETITIONS (C) NO.412 - 413 OF 2012 IN CIVIL APPEALS NO. 9813 AND 9833 OF 2011 AND CONTEMPT PETITION (C) NO.260 OF 2013 IN CIVIL APPEAL NO.8643 OF 2012 S.E.B.I. …Appellant Versus Sahara India Real Estate Corporation Ltd. & Ors. …Respondents J U D G M E N T T.S. Thakur, J. 1. Sahara India Real Estate Corporation Limited (SIRECL) and Sahara Housing Investment Corporation Limited (SHICL) (hereinafter referred to as ‘Saharas’ for short) invited and claim to have collected deposits from general public 1
including cobblers, labourers, artisans and peasants in the form of what were described as ‘Optional Fully Convertible Debentures’ (OFCD). On a complaint received from Professional Group of Investors Protection, SEBI found that the mobilisation of funds under the Red Herring Prospectus (RHP) dated 13 th March, 2008 and 6 th October, 2009 issued by the two companies was not legally permissible. By an ad interim ex parte order dated 24 th November, 2010 SEBI directed Saharas not to offer their equity shares/OFCDS or any other securities to the public or invite subscription in any manner whatsoever either directly or indirectly pending further orders. Aggrieved by the said order Saharas approached the High Court at Bombay but the High Court not only declined to interfere with the directions issued by SEBI but also passed a further order on 23 rd June, 2011, directing the promoter Mr. Subrata Roy Sahara and Directors Miss Vandana Bhargava, Mr. Ravi Shankar Dubey and Mr. Ashok Roy Choudhary of Saharas to jointly and severely refund the amount collected by Saharas in terms of the RHPs issued by them alongwith interest @ 15% p.a. from the date of the receipt of the deposits till the date of 2
such repayment. Pursuant thereto the SEBI ordered that the refund of the amount shall be made only in cash through demand drafts or pay orders. The SEBI issued further directions including a direction that Sahara Commodity Services Corporation Limited (earlier known as SIRECL) and SHICL shall not access the security market for raising funds till the time the aforesaid payments are not made to the satisfaction of the SEBI. 2. Aggrieved by the order aforementioned, Saharas filed an appeal before the Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT) who concurred with the view taken by the SEBI, and while affirming the order passed by the SEBI, directed Saharas to refund the amount collected from the investors within a period of six weeks. 3. Appeals No.9813 and 9833 of 2011 were then preferred by Saharas against the above orders in which this Court by an order dated 28 th November, 2011 extended the period for making the refund upto 9 th January, 2012 but finally disposed of the appeals by an order dated 31 st August, 2012. This Court while doing so modified the order passed by the 3
SEBI and the SAT and directed Saharas to deposit with the SEBI the amount collected by them through their RHPs together with interest @ 15% p.a. within a period of three months. The amount when deposited was directed to be invested in a nationalised bank to earn interest. Saharas were also directed to furnish details with supporting documents to establish whether they had refunded any amount to the investors who had subscribed through the RHPs in question. SEBI was then to examine the correctness of the details so furnished. Failure to prove the refund of the amount by Saharas had to give rise to an inference that Saharas had not refunded the amount to the real and genuine subscribers as directed by the SEBI. 4. It is common ground that directions issued by this Court by its order dated 31 st August, 2012 were not complied with. Instead Appeal No.221 of 2012 was preferred by Saharas before the SAT which was dismissed by the Tribunal as premature. This dismissal was assailed by the Saharas in C.A. No. 8643 of 2012 that came to be disposed of by a three-Judge Bench of this Court by an order dated 5 th 4
December, 2012 with the following among other directions: “ (I) The appellants shall immediately hand over the Demand Drafts, which they have produced in Court, to SEBI, for a total sum of 5120/-Crores and deposit the balance in terms of the order of 31st August, 2012, namely, 17,400/- Crores and the entire amount, in - cluding the amount mentioned above, together with in - terest at the rate of 15 per cent, per annum, with SEBI, in two installments. The first installment of 10,000/-Crores, shall be deposited with SEBI within the first week of January, 2013. The remaining balance, along with the interest, as calculated, shall be de - posited within the first week of February, 2013. The time for filing documents in support of the refunds made to any person, as claimed by the appellants, is extended by a period of 15 days. On receipt of the said documents, SEBI shall implement the directions con - tained in the order passed on 31st August, 2012. In default of deposit of the said documents within the stipulated period, or in the event of default of deposit of either of the two installments, the directions con - tained in paragraph 10 of the aforesaid order dated 31st August, 2012, shall immediately come into effect and SEBI will be entitled to take all legal remedies, in - cluding attachment and sale of properties, freezing of bank accounts etc. for realisation of the balance dues.” 5. Pursuant to the above, Saharas deposited Rs.5120/- crores with the SEBI but failed to pay the remaining amount. The balance amount payable is in the vicinity of Rs.12280/- crores, exclusive of interest payable on the same. SEBI then filed Contempt Petitions No.412 and 413 of 2012 and, Contempt Petition No.260 of 2013 against the contemnors for non-compliance of the directions of this Court. Various orders have been passed in these contempt petitions from time to 5
time, and those which are germane for our purpose, shall be adverted to hereinafter at the appropriate stage. The applications (IAs) which we are dealing with in this order, are filed in these contempt petitions and arise out of the earlier orders passed. 6. It is pertinent to point out at this stage that in the course of the proceedings in the above contempt petitions some proposals appear to have been explored by the parties for compliance with the directions of this Court but all such proposal were found to be unsatisfactory eventually leading to the issue of non-bailable warrants against Mr. Subrata Roy Sahara for his production before this Court. Three other Directors of Saharas were also ordered to remain present before this Court. 7. On 4 th March, 2014 when the contemnors appeared before this Court one of them in custody, this Court recorded a finding that the directions issued by the Court by its order dated 31 st August, 2012 and 5 th December, 2012 and those issued on 25 th February, 2013 in CA No.8643 of 2012 and IA No.67 of 2013 had not been complied with, despite sufficient 6
opportunities to the contemnors to do so. It was also held that contemnors had adopted dilatory tactics to delay the proceedings before the SEBI, the High Court and even before this Court. It was further found that no acceptable proposal was presented to comply with the directions of this Court which left no option for this Court except to commit three out of the four contemnors to judicial custody. The contemnors are, ever since the said order, in judicial custody in Delhi’s Tihar Jail. 8. It is clear from the above narration that as per the orders passed, a huge amount of nearly Rs.33,000/- crores is yet to be deposited. It is also apparent that deadlines for depositing this amount are long over. No doubt various proposals have been given by Saharas for making payments but none has fructified. From the tenor of orders passed earlier, it can easily be gauged that these proposals did not inspire confidence. In this backdrop when the matter again came on 26 th March, 2014, and the contemnors insisted on granting bail to them, this Court passed a conditional Order granting interim bail to the contemnors; the condition being 7
that they deposit Rs.10,000/- crores. Out of this a sum of Rs.5,000/- crores had to be deposited in cash before this Court while the balance amount of Rs.5000/- crores had to be secured by a bank guarantee of a nationalised bank, furnished in favour of the SEBI. Upon compliance with those conditions the contemnors were directed to be released from the custody and the amount deposited by them to be transferred to the SEBI. Since we are directly concerned with this order, we may, as well, extract the same: “ We have gone through the fresh proposal filed on 25.3.2014. Through the same is not in compliance with our Order dated 31.8.2012 or the Order passed by the three-Judge Bench of this Court on 5.12.2012 in Civil Appeal No.8643 of 2012 and on 25.2.2013 in I.A. No. 67 of 2013 in Civil Appeal No.9813 of 2011 with I.A. No.5 of 2013 in Civil Appeal No.9833 of 2011, we are inclined to grant interim bail to the contemnors who are detained by virtue of our order dated 4.3.2014, on the condition taht they would pay the amount of Rs.10,000 crores – out of which Rs.5,000 crores to be deposited before this Court and for the balance a Bank Guarantee of a nationalised bank be furnished in favour of S.E.B.I. and be deposited before this Court. On compliance, the contemnors be released forthwith and the amount deposited be released to S.E.B.I. We make it clear that this order is passed in order to facilitate the contemnors to further raise the balance amount so as to comply with the Court’s Orders mentioned above.” 9. Instead of complying with the above directions Mr. Subrata Roy Sahara filed Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 57 of 2014 8
challenging the validity of the order of this Court dated 4 th March, 2014 on the ground that the same was void and non-est in the eyes of law. A declaration to the effect that continued incarceration of the petitioner Mr. Subrata Roy Sahara in custody was illegal and a writ of habeas corpus and directions for release of the petitioner from custody were also prayed for. The said writ petition was heard by a Bench comprising Hon’ble K.S. Radhakrishnan and J.S. Khehar, J.J. and came to be dismissed vide detailed judgment dated 6 th May, 2014. 10. Having traversed in brief, the otherwise long journey of this case, we revert back to the IAs which are the subject matter of the instant order. In the present I.As. No.101-103 of 2014 filed in Contempt Petitions (C) No.412 and 413 of 2012 and Contempt Petitions (C) No. 260 of 2013, the contemnors have made the following prayers: “ (a) Lift the restrictions imposed by this Hon’ble Court vide its order dated 21.11.2013 and SEBI’s order dated 13.2.2013, in respect of operation of the Bank Accounts/deposits/demat accounts/sale of securities mentioned at Annexure-A ; (b) Lift the restrictions imposed by this Hon’ble Court vide its order dated 21.11.2013 and SEBI’s order dated 13.02.2013 in respect of the movable and immovable properties mentioned in Annexure B , 9
on condition that net proceeds (after costs and taxes) thereof be utilized exclusively for payment ordered by this Hon’ble Court. (c) pass such further or other order as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case.” 11. Justice K.S. Radhakrishnan having demitted office and, Justice J.S. Khehar having recused himself from the further hearing of the case, the applications were listed before us for urgent hearing on 19 th May, 2014 when the same were heard in part and directed to come up for continuation on 29 th May, 2014. 12. Appearing for the contemnors, Dr. Rajiv Dhawan made a three-fold submission before us. Firstly, he contended that the order passed by this Court on 26 th March, 2014 granting interim bail subject to the conditions stipulated in the said order deserved to be modified as the conditions stipulated therein were not only onerous but incapable of being complied with in the facts and circumstances of the case. Alternatively, he contended that compliance with the conditions stipulated by this Court would require sale of several items of immovable properties held by Sahara Group of companies which sales can be finalised only if the contemnors were enlarged from custody 10
with a view to enable them to negotiate the sale transactions. He submitted that keeping in view the extent and nature of the properties which shall have to be sold as also the amounts that have been ordered to be deposited compliance with the conditions stipulated by this Court is extremely difficult, if not impossible, unless the contemnors are enlarged from jail and allowed to take steps necessary for compliance. It was further contended by Dr. Dhawan that the restraint orders against the sale of the moveable and immoveable properties held by the ‘Saharas’ made it impossible for them to arrange compliance unless the embargo placed upon such sale and transfer by this Court’s Order dated 21 st November, 2013 and that passed by SEBI on 13 th February, 2013 are lifted. He argued that even if the contemnors were not enlarged on bail till such time the directions issued by this Court on 26 th March, 2014 were not complied with, the restraint orders would prevent the contemnors from raising necessary funds to comply with the directions issued by this Court. He urged that the total amount currently lying in several bank accounts and/or invested with banks and companies in the form of FDs, Bonds and securities 11
etc. came to Rs.2500/- crores approximately. The broad details of the amounts so available have been given by Saharas in the note submitted by Dr. Dhawan as under: Details of approx. Rs 2500 Crores along with interest accrued thereon to be paid by Saharas within 5 working days of lifting the embargo (Pg 39 – 54) a) Fixed Deposits 1688.74 crores b) Savings Account 464.44 crores c) Current Account 18.45 crores a) Securities & Bonds 142.86 crores b) Government Bonds 72.33 crores c) Bank/PSU Bond 34.85 crores ------------------- 2421.67 crores ------------------- Total approx. Rs 2500 crores along with interest accrued thereon 13. Encashment of the FDs, sale and transfer of the bonds and securities would, argued Dr. Dhawan, help the contemnors to partly comply with the directions regarding deposit of Rs.5000/- crores by moping Rs.2500/- crores. A further sum of Rs.2500/- crores approximately would have to be raised for deposit which will be possible only by sale of the immovable properties situated in nine different cities details whereof were filed by Dr. Dhawan in the form of a statement with the estimated value of such properties which is as under: Sr. No. Properties Valuation as per Page Nos. Of 12
the Valuation Report (Rs. In crores) Volume I 1. Pune 575 60 – 76 @ 73 2. Ahmedabad 470 81 -98 @ 94 3. Amritsar 153.75 99 – 127 @ 111 4. Chauma 1430 128 -148 @ 140 5. Vasai 1169.72 143 – 160 @ 149 6. Ajmer 160 161 -175 @ 167 7. Bhavnagar 103 176 – 191 @ 188 8. Jodhpur 112 192 -208 @ 204 9. Bhopal 125 209 – 224 222 TOTAL 4298.47 14. It was submitted that sale of the above items of property may also not fully satisfy the conditions stipulated by this Court for grant of interim bail thereby leave no option for Saharas except to sell three other items of hotel properties situated outside the country. One of these hotels by the name Grosvenor House is situated in London while the remaining two hotels are in New York (U.S.A.). It was urged that the said three items of property also need to be sold to raise the margin money which the banks concerned insist upon to enable them to issue a bank guarantee. It was submitted that while the contemnors propose to mortgage Aamby Valley 13
properties, details whereof are given in the Annexure B to I.As. No.101-103, the contemnors would require funds to service any financial arrangement made with the bank/banks. It was also contended that according to the estimate of the contemnors, the properties situated in London and New York would fetch an amount of Rs.5,000/- crores to the contemnors which may be utilised in full or in part towards the margin money necessary for obtaining the bank guarantee(s). The estimated value of these three properties is indicated by the contemnors as under : Shares of entities owning the following offshore properties Value as per the Valuation report Expected Sales Value Immediate Advances expected Page No. Grosvenor House, London GBP 516,000,000 Rs 50,929,200,000 GBP 645,000,000 Rs 63,661,500,000 USD 50,000,000 Rs 2,900,000,000 667-Vol III Plaza Hotel, New York USD 592,000,000 Rs 34,336,000,000 USD 635,000,000 Rs 36,830,000,000 USD 50,000,000 Rs 2,900,000,000 415-Vol III Dreams Downtown Hotel, New York USD 252,000,000 Rs 14,616,000,000 USD 252,000,000 Rs 14,616,000,000 USD 50,000,000 Rs 2,900,000,000 231-Vol III Total Rs 115,107,500,000 USD 150,000,000 Rs 8,700,000,000 14
Net Realistic Equity Value to Sahara in India Rs 50,366,156,000 15. On behalf of the respondent-SEBI it was argued by Mr. Venugopal that he has no objection to the encashment of the FD receipts and other securities and bonds etc. provided the maturity value and sale consideration of such FDRs, securities and bonds is directed to be deposited in the designated bank account of SEBI viz. SEBI Sahara Refund Account bearing No.012210110003740 with the Bank of India, Bandra Kurla Complex Branch, Mumbai. As regards sale or mortgage of properties situated in nine different cities mentioned above, Mr. Venugopal submitted that appropriate safeguards need be provided for such sale and transfer. Mr. Venugopal suggested the following safeguards in this regard: (i) Details of valuation, buyer(s) and terms of sales together with letter (s) of intent be submitted in advance to this Hon’ble Court; (ii) Buyer(s) ought not to be related party/parties qua the Sahara Group entities/Director etc. and an affidavit of undertaking to that effect be filed in this Hon’ble Court. (iii) The sale proceeds be deposited by the buyer directly to the designated Bank Account of SEBI 15
viz. “SEBI-Sahara Refund Account” bearing No.012210110003740 with Bank of India, Bandra-Kurla Complex Branch, Mumbai; and (iv) Actual release of title deeds by SEBI to the buyer be made only upon receipt of sale proceeds in the aforementioned Bank Account. 16. A direction to the effect that the sale of the properties shall not be for a price lesser than the circle rates prescribed for the area where the properties are situated was also suggested as an additional safeguard, by the learned counsel. It was also submitted by Mr. Venugopal that so long as the valuation of the assets situated outside the country is fair and reasonable, the SEBI had no objection to the sale thereof to enable the contemnors to raise funds necessary for compliance with the directions of this Court. 17. We have given our careful consideration to the submissions made at the bar. It is apparent, from the submissions made at the bar, that these IAs have two limbs: In the first instance, the contemnors want relaxation in the restraint orders over the Bank deposits and immovable properties to comply with the directions of this Court regarding deposit of the amounts. That part of the prayer does not pose any difficulty, as the same is in aid of compliance with the 16
directions of this Court. Second set of prayers is for grant of bail or relaxation of jail conditions in the interregnum. Here, we have our reservations. We are not inclined to modify order dated 26 th March, 2014 granting interim bail to the contemnors upon conditions stipulated in the said order. We say so because the background in which the contemnors came to be committed to the jail and the finding recorded by the Court that they have at all earlier stages tried to adopt dilatory tactics and avoided to comply with the orders passed by the Court does not in our view call for any modification of the terms on which the contemnors can be released. Dr. Dhawan pleaded, in the alternative, that the least which could be done was to shift the contemnors from Tihar Jail to a guest house for incarceration to enable them to take decisions that are necessary for compliance with the directions issued by this Court. This request was opposed by Mr. Venugopal, according to whom similar requests made repeatedly over several hearings in the past have been declined by this Court, although no specific order refusing the same was recorded. In support of that submission, our attention was drawn to the 17
averments made by the applicant in I.As No.2 to 4 filed by them on 20 th May, 2014 which averments clearly show that similar prayers were indeed made in the past also. 18. Apart from the fact that the prayer now made is a repetition of similar prayers made in the past which have not cut any ice with the bench hearing the matter, we see no reason to make a departure from the usual course in the present case. The Bench has passed a conditional bail order after due and proper consideration having regard to the attendant circumstances including conduct of the contemnors. The order can be modified only under very compelling circumstances. The only reason given by the applicants is that interim release or transfer of the contemnors to a guest house would enable them to dispose of the properties speedily and enable them to arrange for the requisite Bank Guarantees. We don’t think so. It is noteworthy that the total amount to be deposited is between Rs. 33000/- to Rs. 35000/- crores. To show their bonafides, the contemnors have been directed to deposit less than 1/3 rd of that amount as a condition for bail. After all, even when this part of the order is complied with and 18
the contemnors are set free, they will have to arrange the deposit of the balance amount, which again is very substantial. That apart, it is not the case of the contemnors that they or anyone of them suffers from any medical condition that calls for hospitalisation or an atmosphere conducive for recovery from any disease. This Court has already issued directions permitting visitation to those who need to visit the contemnors in jail. That arrangement has not been found to be inadequate as at present so to call for any change. 19. The prayer for modification of the order, accordingly, fails. 20. We, however, find considerable merit in the submission made by Dr. Dhawan that the restraint order issued by the SEBI and by this Court forbidding transfer and alienation of moveable and immoveable assets by the Sahara Group of companies has the effect of preventing the contemnors from complying with the directions of this Court which require them to deposit Rs.5,000/- crores in cash besides a bank guarantee for a similar amount of Rs.5,000/- crores. While it is true that the contemnors stand committed 19
to prison for their non-compliance with the directions of this Court, nothing should prevent them from taking steps to comply with the said directions or the conditions subject to which they have been granted interim bail. Restraint against transfer of the assets by the contemnors and the companies promoted by them precisely has the effect of doing so. The question, however, is as to what extent should the orders of restraint be modified. That aspect assumes importance because of the fact that Saharas need to eventually deposit a substantial amount which according to the current estimate may be in the neighbourhood of Rs. 30,000 to Rs. 35,000 crores inclusive of interest accrued on the principal amount. Sale of valuable properties at a price lesser than the market value of such assets is bound to prejudicially affect the interest of the depositors and defeat the orders passed by this Court in its letter and spirit. That is particularly so because according to Mr. Venugopal, SEBI is unable to value the properties or process the sale and transfer thereof. It was in that background that we had indicated to Dr. Dhawan learned counsel for the appellants that the restraint orders cannot be 20
lifted in toto and that Saharas should come forward with a proposal for sale of such properties as were sufficient to comply with the interim bail direction of this Court regarding deposit of Rs.5,000/- crores in cash and a bank guarantee of Rs.5.000/- in addition. Dr. Dhawan has pursuant to that observation confined his prayer for permission to sell/transfer only nine items of properties situated in nine different cities in the country and disclosed the estimated value of such property in the statement which we have extracted above. Dr. Dhawan on instructions made a statement that although the note filed by him mentions the names of nine different cities without giving details of the properties situated in those cities but the fact remains that the properties referred to in the note are only nine in number and no more. 21. Keeping in view the total number of properties held by Sahara Group of companies, transfer of sale and/or mortgage of the nine items of properties situated in nine cities mentioned in the note and extracted above should, in our opinion, suffice to enable the contemnors to comply with the 26 th March, 2014 directions of this Court. In order, however, to 21
ensure that the sale value is fair and reasonable, we need to make it clear that no item of property shall be sold at a price lesser than the circle value of the properties fixed for the area where such property is located. 22. As regards properties situated in London and New York we have by an interlocutory Order passed on 29 th May, 2014 directed the contemnors to furnish certain additional information necessary for permitting the sale of the said assets. The information demanded includes permission/approval from the Bank of China with whom the said properties are mortgaged and shares held by Saharas for repayment of the loans borrowed from the said bank hypothecated/pledged. We have also directed Saharas to get the amount outstanding towards the loan transactions qua the said properties confirmed from the Bank of China so as to give us a clear picture of the extent of liability that remains to be discharged against the said assets. The fact that the valuation reports regarding the three assets were prepared at the instance of the Bank of China shall also have to be verified and 22
confirmed by the Bank of China, especially because no sale of the assets in question can be permitted at a price lesser than the price at which the said assets have been valued by the valuers who are said to be valuers of repute. Directions regarding sale of the assets outside the country can, therefore, await the furnishing of information and verification of the facts. 23. In the result we dispose of these I.As with the following directions: (i) The prayer for modification of the terms stipulated in our order dated 26 th March, 2014 granting interim bail to the contemnors is declined and the I.As to that extent dismissed. (ii) Prayer for shifting the contemnors to a guest house for continued custody and detention till they comply with the directions of this Court for their release on interim bail is also declined and the I.As dismissed to that extent. (iii) Orders dated 21 st November, 2013 passed by this Court and that dated 13 th February, 2013 23
passed by SEBI restraining sale and transfer of moveable and immoveable properties held by Saharas are modified to the following extent: (a) FDs, bonds and securities held by Sahara Group of companies may be encashed by the holders thereof subject to the condition that the maturity value/sale consideration of such FDs, bonds and securities shall be deposited in the designated bank account of SEBI referred to in the earlier part of this order and details of such maturity values and sale consideration furnished to this Court on affidavit to be filed within four weeks from the date the FDs, bonds and securities are encashed, sold and/or transferred. (b) Immovable properties owned by Sahara Group of companies situated in 9 different cities mentioned in the note filed by Dr. Dhawan and extracted in the body of this order with an estimated value of Rs.2500/- crores are permitted to be sold by the companies/other entities persons in whose names such properties are held subject to the condition that such sales are not for a price lower than the estimated value indicated in the statement filed before this Court or the circle rates fixed for the area in which such properties are situated. The seller shall furnish to this Court the details of the valuation of the properties sold and the terms of sales together with a declaration that the purchasers is not a 24
related party qua Saharas. Needless to say that upon deposit of the sale consideration the title deeds of the property shall be released by SEBI in favour of the purchaser(s). (c) The sale consideration of the properties less transaction cost and statutory dues on the same shall be deposited with the SEBI to the extent the same is necessary to make a total deposit of Rs.5,000/- crores inclusive of the maturity value and sale proceeds of the FDs, bonds and securities etc. permitted to be encashed and sold in terms of direction (iii) (a) above. The balance/excess amount of the sale consideration shall be deposited by Saharas in a separate account to be opened in a nationalised bank which deposit shall remain subject to further orders of this Court. (d) Saharas are also permitted to charge its immovable properties situated in Aamby Valley (Pune), the details whereof are given in Annexure B to IAs No.101-103, for purposes of furnishing a bank guarantee for an amount of Rs.5,000/- crores and/or for deposit of Rs.5,000/- crores if there is any shortfall despite encashment and sales permitted in terms of (iii)(a) and (iii)(b) above. (e) In modification of the orders dated 26 th March, 2014, we direct that the Bank guarantees to the tune of Rs.5000/- crores shall be furnished from 25
a nationalised bank or a scheduled bank only. Co-operative Bank Guarantees shall not suffice. (iv) In so far as sale of the three properties situated outside the country are concerned, the question is left open to be determined after the requisite documents/information is made available by Sahara in terms of our order dated 29 th May, 2014. (v) Keeping in view the importance of the issues that fall for determination in these proceedings and the ramifications that the directions issued by this Court may have as also the fact that one very important order which is sought to be enforced in these proceedings was passed by a three-Judge Bench, we refer these proceedings to a three-Judge Bench to be constituted by the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India. (vi) We are further of the view that having regard 26
to the nature of these proceedings and the stakes that are involved, we need to appoint an amicus curiae. We accordingly, request Mr. F.S. Nariman, Senior Advocate to assist the Court as an amicus curiae. Shri Nariman shall be free to associate two juniors of his choice to brief him in the matter. (vii) We direct that the Amicus curiae shall be paid his fee @ Rs.1,10,000/- per hearing while the juniors assisting him shall be paid Rs.10,000/- per person for every hearing. The amount so due shall be paid by SEBI by debit to account Saharas. ………………….……….…..…J. (T.S. THAKUR) ………………….……….…..…J. (A.K. SIKRI) New Delhi June 4, 2014 27
ITEM NO.1A COURT NO.3 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. No(s). 101-103 in Contempt Petition(s)(Civil) No(s). 412 & 413 of 2012 in Civil Appeal No(s). 9813 & 9833 of 2011 and Contempt Petition(s) Civil Nos(s). 260 of 2013 in Civil Appeal No(s). 8643 of 2012. S.E.B.I. .. Appellant(s) VERSUS SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPORATION LTD. & ORS.. Respondents(s) Date : 04/06/2014 These applications were called on for pronouncement of judgment today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Gaurav Nair, Adv.for M/s. K.J. John & Co. For Respondent(s) Mr. S. Ganesh, Sr.Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Sandeep Bajaj, Adv. Mrs.Shally Bhasin Maheshwari,Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh, Adv. Hon'ble Mr. Justice T.S. Thakur pronounced the judgment of the Bench comprising His Lordship and Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.K. Sikri. Keeping in view the importance of the issues that fall for determination in these proceedings and the ramifications that the directions issued by this Court may have as also the fact that one very important order which is sought to be enforced in these proceedings was passed by a three-Judge Bench, we refer these proceedings to a three-Judge Bench to be constituted by the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India. I.A.Nos.101-103 are disposed of in terms of the judgment. (USHA BHARDWAJ) (RENUKA SADANA) AR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (SIGNED REPORTABLE JUDGMENT IS PLACED ON THE FILE) 28
<4 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION I.A. NOs. 101-103 IN CONTEMPT PETITIONS (C) NO.412 - 413 OF 2012 IN CIVIL APPEALS NO. 9813 AND 9833 OF 2011 AND CONTEMPT PETITION (C) NO.260 OF 2013 IN CIVIL APPEAL NO.8643 OF 2012 S.E.B.I. ...Appellant Versus Sahara India Real Estate Corporation Ltd. & Ors. ...Respondents JUDGMENT T.S. Thakur, J. 1. Sahara India Real Estate Corporation Limited (SIRECL) and Sahara Housing Investment Corporation LimitedSignature Not Verified (SHICL) (hereinafter referred to as `Saharas' for short) invitedDigitally signed byUsha Rani BhardwajDate: 2014.06.0416:07:53 ISTReason: and claim to have collected deposits from general public 1including cobblers, labourers, artisans and peasants in theform of what were described as `Optional Fully ConvertibleDebentures' (OFCD). On a complaint received fromProfessional Group of Investors Protection, SEBI found that themobilisation of funds under the Red Herring Prospectus (RHP)dated 13th March, 2008 and 6th October, 2009 issued by thetwo companies was not legally permissible. By an ad interimex parte order dated 24th November, 2010 SEBI directedSaharas not to offer their equity shares/OFCDS or any other
securities to the public or invite subscription in any mannerwhatsoever either directly or indirectly pending further orders.Aggrieved by the said order Saharas approached the HighCourt at Bombay but the High Court not only declined tointerfere with the directions issued by SEBI but also passed afurther order on 23rd June, 2011, directing the promoter Mr.Subrata Roy Sahara and Directors Miss Vandana Bhargava, Mr.Ravi Shankar Dubey and Mr. Ashok Roy Choudhary of Saharasto jointly and severely refund the amount collected by Saharasin terms of the RHPs issued by them alongwith interest @ 15%p.a. from the date of the receipt of the deposits till the date of 2such repayment. Pursuant thereto the SEBI ordered that therefund of the amount shall be made only in cash throughdemand drafts or pay orders. The SEBI issued furtherdirections including a direction that Sahara CommodityServices Corporation Limited (earlier known as SIRECL) andSHICL shall not access the security market for raising funds tillthe time the aforesaid payments are not made to thesatisfaction of the SEBI.2. Aggrieved by the order aforementioned, Saharas filedan appeal before the Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT) whoconcurred with the view taken by the SEBI, and while affirmingthe order passed by the SEBI, directed Saharas to refund theamount collected from the investors within a period of sixweeks.3. Appeals No.9813 and 9833 of 2011 were thenpreferred by Saharas against the above orders in which thisCourt by an order dated 28th November, 2011 extended theperiod for making the refund upto 9 th January, 2012 but finallydisposed of the appeals by an order dated 31st August, 2012.This Court while doing so modified the order passed by the 3SEBI and the SAT and directed Saharas to deposit with theSEBI the amount collected by them through their RHPs
together with interest @ 15% p.a. within a period of threemonths. The amount when deposited was directed to beinvested in a nationalised bank to earn interest. Saharas werealso directed to furnish details with supporting documents toestablish whether they had refunded any amount to theinvestors who had subscribed through the RHPs in question.SEBI was then to examine the correctness of the details sofurnished. Failure to prove the refund of the amount bySaharas had to give rise to an inference that Saharas had notrefunded the amount to the real and genuine subscribers asdirected by the SEBI.4. It is common ground that directions issued by thisCourt by its order dated 31st August, 2012 were not compliedwith. Instead Appeal No.221 of 2012 was preferred by Saharasbefore the SAT which was dismissed by the Tribunal aspremature. This dismissal was assailed by the Saharas in C.A.No. 8643 of 2012 that came to be disposed of by athree-Judge Bench of this Court by an order dated 5 th 4December, 2012 with the following among other directions: "(I) The appellants shall immediately hand over the Demand Drafts, which they have produced in Court, to SEBI, for a total sum of 5120/-Crores and deposit the balance in terms of the order of 31st August, 2012, namely, 17,400/- Crores and the entire amount, in- cluding the amount mentioned above, together with in- terest at the rate of 15 per cent, per annum, with SEBI, in two installments. The first installment of 10,000/-Crores, shall be deposited with SEBI within the first week of January, 2013. The remaining balance, along with the interest, as calculated, shall be de- posited within the first week of February, 2013. The time for filing documents in support of the refunds made to any person, as claimed by the appellants, is extended by a period of 15 days. On receipt of the said documents, SEBI shall implement the directions con- tained in the order passed on 31st August, 2012. In default of deposit of the said documents within the stipulated period, or in the event of default of deposit of either of the two installments, the directions con- tained in paragraph 10 of the aforesaid order dated 31st August, 2012, shall immediately come into effect and SEBI will be entitled to take all legal remedies, in- cluding attachment and sale of properties, freezing of bank accounts etc. for realisation of the balance dues."5. Pursuant to the above, Saharas deposited Rs.5120/-
crores with the SEBI but failed to pay the remaining amount.The balance amount payable is in the vicinity of Rs.12280/-crores, exclusive of interest payable on the same. SEBI thenfiled Contempt Petitions No.412 and 413 of 2012 and,Contempt Petition No.260 of 2013 against the contemnors fornon-compliance of the directions of this Court. Various ordershave been passed in these contempt petitions from time to 5time, and those which are germane for our purpose, shall beadverted to hereinafter at the appropriate stage. Theapplications (IAs) which we are dealing with in this order, arefiled in these contempt petitions and arise out of the earlierorders passed.6. It is pertinent to point out at this stage that in thecourse of the proceedings in the above contempt petitionssome proposals appear to have been explored by the partiesfor compliance with the directions of this Court but all suchproposal were found to be unsatisfactory eventually leading tothe issue of non-bailable warrants against Mr. Subrata RoySahara for his production before this Court. Three otherDirectors of Saharas were also ordered to remain presentbefore this Court.7. On 4th March, 2014 when the contemnors appearedbefore this Court one of them in custody, this Court recorded afinding that the directions issued by the Court by its orderdated 31st August, 2012 and 5th December, 2012 and thoseissued on 25th February, 2013 in CA No.8643 of 2012 and IANo.67 of 2013 had not been complied with, despite sufficient 6opportunities to the contemnors to do so. It was also held thatcontemnors had adopted dilatory tactics to delay theproceedings before the SEBI, the High Court and even beforethis Court. It was further found that no acceptable proposalwas presented to comply with the directions of this Courtwhich left no option for this Court except to commit three out
of the four contemnors to judicial custody. The contemnorsare, ever since the said order, in judicial custody in Delhi'sTihar Jail.8. It is clear from the above narration that as per theorders passed, a huge amount of nearly Rs.33,000/- crores isyet to be deposited. It is also apparent that deadlines fordepositing this amount are long over. No doubt variousproposals have been given by Saharas for making paymentsbut none has fructified. From the tenor of orders passedearlier, it can easily be gauged that these proposals did notinspire confidence. In this backdrop when the matter againcame on 26th March, 2014, and the contemnors insisted ongranting bail to them, this Court passed a conditional Ordergranting interim bail to the contemnors; the condition being 7that they deposit Rs.10,000/- crores. Out of this a sum ofRs.5,000/- crores had to be deposited in cash before this Courtwhile the balance amount of Rs.5000/- crores had to besecured by a bank guarantee of a nationalised bank, furnishedin favour of the SEBI. Upon compliance with those conditionsthe contemnors were directed to be released from the custodyand the amount deposited by them to be transferred to theSEBI. Since we are directly concerned with this order, we may,as well, extract the same: "We have gone through the fresh proposal filed on 25.3.2014. Through the same is not in compliance with our Order dated 31.8.2012 or the Order passed by the three-Judge Bench of this Court on 5.12.2012 in Civil Appeal No.8643 of 2012 and on 25.2.2013 in I.A. No. 67 of 2013 in Civil Appeal No.9813 of 2011 with I.A. No.5 of 2013 in Civil Appeal No.9833 of 2011, we are inclined to grant interim bail to the contemnors who are detained by virtue of our order dated 4.3.2014, on the condition taht they would pay the amount of Rs.10,000 crores - out of which Rs.5,000 crores to be deposited before this Court and for the balance a Bank Guarantee of a nationalised bank be furnished in favour of S.E.B.I. and be deposited before this Court. On compliance, the contemnors be released forthwith and the amount deposited be released to S.E.B.I. We make it clear that this order is passed in order to facilitate the contemnors to further raise the balance amount so as to comply with the Court's
Orders mentioned above."9. Instead of complying with the above directions Mr.Subrata Roy Sahara filed Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 57 of 2014 8challenging the validity of the order of this Court dated 4 thMarch, 2014 on the ground that the same was void andnon-est in the eyes of law. A declaration to the effect thatcontinued incarceration of the petitioner Mr. Subrata RoySahara in custody was illegal and a writ of habeas corpus anddirections for release of the petitioner from custody were alsoprayed for. The said writ petition was heard by a Benchcomprising Hon'ble K.S. Radhakrishnan and J.S. Khehar, J.J.and came to be dismissed vide detailed judgment dated 6 thMay, 2014.10. Having traversed in brief, the otherwise long journeyof this case, we revert back to the IAs which are the subjectmatter of the instant order. In the present I.As. No.101-103 of2014 filed in Contempt Petitions (C) No.412 and 413 of 2012and Contempt Petitions (C) No. 260 of 2013, the contemnorshave made the following prayers: "(a) Lift the restrictions imposed by this Hon'ble Court vide its order dated 21.11.2013 and SEBI's order dated 13.2.2013, in respect of operation of the Bank Accounts/deposits/demat accounts/sale of securities mentioned at Annexure-A; (b) Lift the restrictions imposed by this Hon'ble Court vide its order dated 21.11.2013 and SEBI's order dated 13.02.2013 in respect of the movable and immovable properties mentioned in Annexure B, 9 on condition that net proceeds (after costs and taxes) thereof be utilized exclusively for payment ordered by this Hon'ble Court. (c) pass such further or other order as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case."11. Justice K.S. Radhakrishnan having demitted officeand, Justice J.S. Khehar having recused himself from thefurther hearing of the case, the applications were listed beforeus for urgent hearing on 19th May, 2014 when the same wereheard in part and directed to come up for continuation on 29 thMay, 2014.
12. Appearing for the contemnors, Dr. Rajiv Dhawanmade a three-fold submission before us. Firstly, he contendedthat the order passed by this Court on 26th March, 2014granting interim bail subject to the conditions stipulated in thesaid order deserved to be modified as the conditions stipulatedtherein were not only onerous but incapable of being compliedwith in the facts and circumstances of the case. Alternatively,he contended that compliance with the conditions stipulated bythis Court would require sale of several items of immovableproperties held by Sahara Group of companies which sales canbe finalised only if the contemnors were enlarged from custody 10with a view to enable them to negotiate the sale transactions.He submitted that keeping in view the extent and nature of theproperties which shall have to be sold as also the amounts thathave been ordered to be deposited compliance with theconditions stipulated by this Court is extremely difficult, if notimpossible, unless the contemnors are enlarged from jail andallowed to take steps necessary for compliance. It was furthercontended by Dr. Dhawan that the restraint orders against thesale of the moveable and immoveable properties held by the`Saharas' made it impossible for them to arrange complianceunless the embargo placed upon such sale and transfer by thisCourt's Order dated 21st November, 2013 and that passed bySEBI on 13th February, 2013 are lifted. He argued that even ifthe contemnors were not enlarged on bail till such time thedirections issued by this Court on 26 th March, 2014 were notcomplied with, the restraint orders would prevent thecontemnors from raising necessary funds to comply with thedirections issued by this Court. He urged that the total amountcurrently lying in several bank accounts and/or invested withbanks and companies in the form of FDs, Bonds and securities 11etc. came to Rs.2500/- crores approximately. The broad
details of the amounts so available have been given bySaharas in the note submitted by Dr. Dhawan as under: Details of approx. Rs 2500 Crores along with interest accrued thereon to be paid by Saharas within 5 working days of lifting the embargo (Pg 39 - 54) a) Fixed Deposits 1688.74 crores b) Savings Account 464.44 crores c) Current Account 18.45 crores a) Securities & Bonds 142.86 crores b) Government Bonds 72.33 crores c) Bank/PSU Bond 34.85 crores ------------------- 2421.67 crores ------------------- Total approx. Rs 2500 crores along with interest accrued thereon13. Encashment of the FDs, sale and transfer of thebonds and securities would, argued Dr. Dhawan, help thecontemnors to partly comply with the directions regardingdeposit of Rs.5000/- crores by moping Rs.2500/- crores. Afurther sum of Rs.2500/- crores approximately would have tobe raised for deposit which will be possible only by sale of theimmovable properties situated in nine different cities detailswhereof were filed by Dr. Dhawan in the form of a statementwith the estimated value of such properties which is as under: Sr. No. Properties Valuation as per Page Nos. Of 12 the Valuation Volume I Report (Rs. In crores) 1. Pune 575 60 - 76 @ 73 2. Ahmedabad 470 81 -98 @ 94 3. Amritsar 153.75 99 - 127 @ 111 4. Chauma 1430 128 -148 @ 140 5. Vasai 1169.72 143 - 160 @ 149 6. Ajmer 160 161 -175 @ 167 7. Bhavnagar 103 176 - 191 @ 188 8. Jodhpur 112 192 -208 @ 204 9. Bhopal 125 209 - 224 222 TOTAL 4298.4714. It was submitted that sale of the above items of
property may also not fully satisfy the conditions stipulated bythis Court for grant of interim bail thereby leave no option forSaharas except to sell three other items of hotel propertiessituated outside the country. One of these hotels by the nameGrosvenor House is situated in London while the remaining twohotels are in New York (U.S.A.). It was urged that the saidthree items of property also need to be sold to raise themargin money which the banks concerned insist upon toenable them to issue a bank guarantee. It was submitted thatwhile the contemnors propose to mortgage Aamby Valley 13properties, details whereof are given in the Annexure B toI.As. No.101-103, the contemnors would require funds toservice any financial arrangement made with the bank/banks.It was also contended that according to the estimate of thecontemnors, the properties situated in London and New Yorkwould fetch an amount of Rs.5,000/- crores to the contemnorswhich may be utilised in full or in part towards the marginmoney necessary for obtaining the bank guarantee(s). Theestimated value of these three properties is indicated by thecontemnors as under :Shares of Value as per Expected Sales Immediate Page No.entities the Valuation Value Advancesowning the report expectedfollowingoffshorepropertiesGrosvenor GBP 516,000,000 GBP 645,000,000 USD 50,000,000 667-Vol IIIHouse, Rs Rs 63,661,500,000 Rs 2,900,000,000London 50,929,200,000Plaza Hotel, USD USD 635,000,000 USD 50,000,000 415-Vol IIINew York 592,000,000 Rs 36,830,000,000 Rs 2,900,000,000 Rs 34,336,000,000Dreams USD USD 252,000,000 USD 50,000,000 231-Vol IIIDowntown 252,000,000 Rs 14,616,000,000 Rs 2,900,000,000Hotel, New RsYork 14,616,000,000Total Rs USD 115,107,500,000 150,000,000 Rs 8,700,000,000
14Net Rs 50,366,156,000RealisticEquityValue toSahara inIndia15. On behalf of the respondent-SEBI it was argued byMr. Venugopal that he has no objection to the encashment ofthe FD receipts and other securities and bonds etc. providedthe maturity value and sale consideration of such FDRs,securities and bonds is directed to be deposited in thedesignated bank account of SEBI viz. SEBI Sahara RefundAccount bearing No.012210110003740 with the Bank of India,Bandra Kurla Complex Branch, Mumbai. As regards sale ormortgage of properties situated in nine different citiesmentioned above, Mr. Venugopal submitted that appropriatesafeguards need be provided for such sale and transfer. Mr.Venugopal suggested the following safeguards in this regard: (i) Details of valuation, buyer(s) and terms of sales together with letter (s) of intent be submitted in advance to this Hon'ble Court; (ii) Buyer(s) ought not to be related party/parties qua the Sahara Group entities/Director etc. and an affidavit of undertaking to that effect be filed in this Hon'ble Court. (iii) The sale proceeds be deposited by the buyer directly to the designated Bank Account of SEBI 15 viz. "SEBI-Sahara Refund Account" bearing No.012210110003740 with Bank of India, Bandra-Kurla Complex Branch, Mumbai; and (iv) Actual release of title deeds by SEBI to the buyer be made only upon receipt of sale proceeds in the aforementioned Bank Account.16. A direction to the effect that the sale of the propertiesshall not be for a price lesser than the circle rates prescribedfor the area where the properties are situated was alsosuggested as an additional safeguard, by the learned counsel.It was also submitted by Mr. Venugopal that so long as thevaluation of the assets situated outside the country is fair and
reasonable, the SEBI had no objection to the sale thereof toenable the contemnors to raise funds necessary for compliancewith the directions of this Court.17. We have given our careful consideration to thesubmissions made at the bar. It is apparent, from thesubmissions made at the bar, that these IAs have two limbs:In the first instance, the contemnors want relaxation in therestraint orders over the Bank deposits and immovableproperties to comply with the directions of this Court regardingdeposit of the amounts. That part of the prayer does not poseany difficulty, as the same is in aid of compliance with the 16directions of this Court. Second set of prayers is for grant ofbail or relaxation of jail conditions in the interregnum. Here,we have our reservations. We are not inclined to modify orderdated 26th March, 2014 granting interim bail to the contemnorsupon conditions stipulated in the said order. We say so becausethe background in which the contemnors came to becommitted to the jail and the finding recorded by the Courtthat they have at all earlier stages tried to adopt dilatorytactics and avoided to comply with the orders passed by theCourt does not in our view call for any modification of theterms on which the contemnors can be released. Dr. Dhawanpleaded, in the alternative, that the least which could be donewas to shift the contemnors from Tihar Jail to a guest housefor incarceration to enable them to take decisions that arenecessary for compliance with the directions issued by thisCourt. This request was opposed by Mr. Venugopal, accordingto whom similar requests made repeatedly over severalhearings in the past have been declined by this Court,although no specific order refusing the same was recorded. Insupport of that submission, our attention was drawn to the 17averments made by the applicant in I.As No.2 to 4 filed bythem on 20th May, 2014 which averments clearly show that
similar prayers were indeed made in the past also.18. Apart from the fact that the prayer now made is arepetition of similar prayers made in the past which have notcut any ice with the bench hearing the matter, we see noreason to make a departure from the usual course in thepresent case. The Bench has passed a conditional bail orderafter due and proper consideration having regard to theattendant circumstances including conduct of the contemnors.The order can be modified only under very compellingcircumstances. The only reason given by the applicants is thatinterim release or transfer of the contemnors to a guest housewould enable them to dispose of the properties speedily andenable them to arrange for the requisite Bank Guarantees. Wedon't think so. It is noteworthy that the total amount to bedeposited is between Rs. 33000/- to Rs. 35000/- crores. Toshow their bonafides, the contemnors have been directed todeposit less than 1/3rd of that amount as a condition for bail.After all, even when this part of the order is complied with and 18the contemnors are set free, they will have to arrange thedeposit of the balance amount, which again is very substantial.That apart, it is not the case of the contemnors that they oranyone of them suffers from any medical condition that callsfor hospitalisation or an atmosphere conducive for recoveryfrom any disease. This Court has already issued directionspermitting visitation to those who need to visit the contemnorsin jail. That arrangement has not been found to be inadequateas at present so to call for any change.19. The prayer for modification of the order, accordingly,fails.20. We, however, find considerable merit in thesubmission made by Dr. Dhawan that the restraint orderissued by the SEBI and by this Court forbidding transfer andalienation of moveable and immoveable assets by the Sahara
Group of companies has the effect of preventing thecontemnors from complying with the directions of this Courtwhich require them to deposit Rs.5,000/- crores in cashbesides a bank guarantee for a similar amount of Rs.5,000/-crores. While it is true that the contemnors stand committed 19to prison for their non-compliance with the directions of thisCourt, nothing should prevent them from taking steps tocomply with the said directions or the conditions subject towhich they have been granted interim bail. Restraint againsttransfer of the assets by the contemnors and the companiespromoted by them precisely has the effect of doing so. Thequestion, however, is as to what extent should the orders ofrestraint be modified. That aspect assumes importancebecause of the fact that Saharas need to eventually deposit asubstantial amount which according to the current estimatemay be in the neighbourhood of Rs. 30,000 to Rs. 35,000crores inclusive of interest accrued on the principal amount.Sale of valuable properties at a price lesser than the marketvalue of such assets is bound to prejudicially affect the interestof the depositors and defeat the orders passed by this Court inits letter and spirit. That is particularly so because according toMr. Venugopal, SEBI is unable to value the properties orprocess the sale and transfer thereof. It was in thatbackground that we had indicated to Dr. Dhawan learnedcounsel for the appellants that the restraint orders cannot be 20lifted in toto and that Saharas should come forward with aproposal for sale of such properties as were sufficient tocomply with the interim bail direction of this Court regardingdeposit of Rs.5,000/- crores in cash and a bank guarantee ofRs.5.000/- in addition. Dr. Dhawan has pursuant to thatobservation confined his prayer for permission to sell/transferonly nine items of properties situated in nine different cities inthe country and disclosed the estimated value of such property
in the statement which we have extracted above. Dr. Dhawanon instructions made a statement that although the note filedby him mentions the names of nine different cities withoutgiving details of the properties situated in those cities but thefact remains that the properties referred to in the note areonly nine in number and no more.21. Keeping in view the total number of properties heldby Sahara Group of companies, transfer of sale and/ormortgage of the nine items of properties situated in nine citiesmentioned in the note and extracted above should, in ouropinion, suffice to enable the contemnors to comply with the26th March, 2014 directions of this Court. In order, however, to 21ensure that the sale value is fair and reasonable, we need tomake it clear that no item of property shall be sold at a pricelesser than the circle value of the properties fixed for the areawhere such property is located.22. As regards properties situated in London and NewYork we have by an interlocutory Order passed on 29 th May,2014 directed the contemnors to furnish certain additionalinformation necessary for permitting the sale of the saidassets. The information demanded includespermission/approval from the Bank of China with whom thesaid properties are mortgaged and shares held by Saharas forrepayment of the loans borrowed from the said bankhypothecated/pledged. We have also directed Saharas to getthe amount outstanding towards the loan transactions qua thesaid properties confirmed from the Bank of China so as to giveus a clear picture of the extent of liability that remains to bedischarged against the said assets. The fact that the valuationreports regarding the three assets were prepared at theinstance of the Bank of China shall also have to be verified and
22confirmed by the Bank of China, especially because no sale ofthe assets in question can be permitted at a price lesser thanthe price at which the said assets have been valued by thevaluers who are said to be valuers of repute. Directionsregarding sale of the assets outside the country can, therefore,await the furnishing of information and verification of the facts.23. In the result we dispose of these I.As with thefollowing directions: (i) The prayer for modification of the terms stipulated in our order dated 26th March, 2014 granting interim bail to the contemnors is declined and the I.As to that extent dismissed. (ii) Prayer for shifting the contemnors to a guest house for continued custody and detention till they comply with the directions of this Court for their release on interim bail is also declined and the I.As dismissed to that extent. (iii) Orders dated 21st November, 2013 passed by this Court and that dated 13th February, 2013 23passed by SEBI restraining sale and transfer ofmoveable and immoveable properties held bySaharas are modified to the following extent:(a) FDs, bonds and securities held by Sahara Group of companies may be encashed by the holders thereof subject to the condition that the maturity value/sale consideration of such FDs, bonds and securities shall be deposited in the designated bank account of SEBI referred to in the earlier part of this order and details of such maturity values and sale consideration furnished to this Court on affidavit to be filed within four weeks from the date the FDs, bonds and securities are encashed, sold and/or transferred.(b) Immovable properties owned by Sahara Group of companies situated in 9 different cities mentioned in the note filed by Dr. Dhawan and extracted in the body of this order with an estimated value of Rs.2500/- crores are permitted to be sold by the companies/other
entities persons in whose names such properties are held subject to the condition that such sales are not for a price lower than the estimated value indicated in the statement filed before this Court or the circle rates fixed for the area in which such properties are situated. The seller shall furnish to this Court the details of the valuation of the properties sold and the terms of sales together with a declaration that the purchasers is not a 24 related party qua Saharas. Needless to say that upon deposit of the sale consideration the title deeds of the property shall be released by SEBI in favour of the purchaser(s).(c) The sale consideration of the properties less transaction cost and statutory dues on the same shall be deposited with the SEBI to the extent the same is necessary to make a total deposit of Rs.5,000/- crores inclusive of the maturity value and sale proceeds of the FDs, bonds and securities etc. permitted to be encashed and sold in terms of direction (iii) (a) above. The balance/excess amount of the sale consideration shall be deposited by Saharas in a separate account to be opened in a nationalised bank which deposit shall remain subject to further orders of this Court.(d) Saharas are also permitted to charge its immovable properties situated in Aamby Valley (Pune), the details whereof are given in Annexure B to IAs No.101-103, for purposes of furnishing a bank guarantee for an amount of Rs.5,000/- crores and/or for deposit of Rs.5,000/- crores if there is any shortfall despite encashment and sales permitted in terms of (iii)(a) and (iii)(b) above.(e) In modification of the orders dated 26 th March, 2014, we direct that the Bank guarantees to the tune of Rs.5000/- crores shall be furnished from 25 a nationalised bank or a scheduled bank only. Co-operative Bank Guarantees shall not suffice.(iv) In so far as sale of the three properties situated outside the country are concerned, the question is left open to be determined after the requisite documents/information is made available by Sahara in terms of our order dated 29th May, 2014.(v) Keeping in view the importance of the issues that fall for determination in these proceedings
and the ramifications that the directions issued by this Court may have as also the fact that one very important order which is sought to be enforced in these proceedings was passed by a three-Judge Bench, we refer these proceedings to a three-Judge Bench to be constituted by the Hon'ble Chief Justice of India.(vi) We are further of the view that having regard 26 to the nature of these proceedings and the stakes that are involved, we need to appoint an amicus curiae. We accordingly, request Mr. F.S. Nariman, Senior Advocate to assist the Court as an amicus curiae. Shri Nariman shall be free to associate two juniors of his choice to brief him in the matter. (vii) We direct that the Amicus curiae shall be paid his fee @ Rs.1,10,000/- per hearing while the juniors assisting him shall be paid Rs.10,000/- per person for every hearing. The amount so due shall be paid by SEBI by debit to account Saharas. ........................................J. (T.S. THAKUR) ........................................J. (A.K. SIKRI)New DelhiJune 4, 2014 27ITEM NO.1A COURT NO.3 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
I.A. No(s). 101-103 in Contempt Petition(s)(Civil) No(s). 412 &413 of 2012 in Civil Appeal No(s). 9813 & 9833 of 2011 andContempt Petition(s) Civil Nos(s). 260 of 2013 in Civil AppealNo(s). 8643 of 2012.S.E.B.I. .. Appellant(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPORATION LTD. & ORS.. Respondents(s)Date : 04/06/2014 These applications were called on for pronouncement of judgment today.For Appellant(s) Mr. Gaurav Nair, Adv.for M/s. K.J. John & Co.For Respondent(s) Mr. S. Ganesh, Sr.Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Sandeep Bajaj, Adv. Mrs.Shally Bhasin Maheshwari,Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh, Adv. Hon'ble Mr. Justice T.S. Thakur pronounced the judgment ofthe Bench comprising His Lordship and Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.K.Sikri. Keeping in view the importance of the issues that fall fordetermination in these proceedings and the ramifications thatthe directions issued by this Court may have as also the factthat one very important order which is sought to be enforced inthese proceedings was passed by a three-Judge Bench, we referthese proceedings to a three-Judge Bench to be constituted bythe Hon'ble Chief Justice of India. I.A.Nos.101-103 are disposed of in terms of the judgment.(USHA BHARDWAJ) (RENUKA SADANA) AR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (SIGNED REPORTABLE JUDGMENT IS PLACED ON THE FILE) 28
¦* 1 OUT TODAYITEM NO.1 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSIA Nos. 101-103 inCONTEMPT PETITION (C) NO. 412-413 OF 2012 IN Civil Appeal 9813/2011& 9833/2011 and CONT. PET.(C) NO. 260/2013 IN C.A. NO. 8643/2012S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for modification of order dated 21.11.2013 and officereport)Date: 29/05/2014 These applns. were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI (VACATION BENCH)For Petitioner(s) Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair, Adv. M/S. K.J. John & Co. Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh ,AdvFor Respondent(s) Dr. Rajeev Dhavan, Sr.Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. Jatin Pore, Adv. Mr. Sandeep Bajaj, Adv. Mrs.Shally Bhasin Maheshwari,Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi ,Adv UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Heard. Order reserved. In the course of the resumed hearing today, Dr. Dhawan, learned senior counsel for the applicant contended that apart from selling the immovable properties situated within the country `Saharas' propose to sell their stakes in three other properties situated outside the country. One of these three 2properties happens to be Grosvenor House in Londonwhile the other two namely, Plaza Hotel and DreamsDowntown hotel are in New York in the United States ofAmerica. Dr. Dhawan argued that the Saharas ownsubstantial stakes in these properties no matter thesame are subject to a charge in favour of the bank ofChina. The `shares' held by the Saharas, in thecompanies that own those properties argued Dr. Dhawanare also pledged with the Bank of China for repaymentof the outstanding loan to the said Bank. Accordingto Dr. Dhawan, the Saharas have already taken up thematter with the Bank of China proposing to dispose oftheir stakes in the said three properties to which the
Bank has given its, in principle, approval. It wassubmitted that this Court could apart from lifting theembargo on the sale of the moveable and immovableassets in India, vacate the same qua the said threeproperties to enable Saharas to comply with thedirections issued by this court. There is nothing on record before us to showthat any request as mentioned by Dr. Dhawan was madeby the Saharas to the Bank of China at any stage.Even so we see no reason why we should prevent Saharasfrom taking up the matter with the Bank of China forits permission/consent to the proposedtransfer/sale/alienation of their stakes in the equityof the companies that own the said properties. Dr.Dhawan submitted, on instructions, that an appropriatecommunication could subject to the order of this Courtbe addressed to the Bank of China by the Saharasseeking its approval to the proposed transfer of thestakes held by Saharas in the three propertiesmentioned above, subject to the repayment of the loanoutstanding against those properties. Dr. Dhawansubmitted that a copy of the communication addressedto the Bank of China and its response shall be placedon record before this Court along with an affidavitwithin one week from today. He further submitted thatapart from the correspondence that may be exchanged onthe subject between Saharas and the Bank of China, theBank of China will also be requested to confirm theamount that is outstanding towards the loan advancedby it in regard to each one of the three propertiesmentioned above to give a clear picture to this Courtas to the outstanding liability that remains to beliquidated by the Saharas qua the said properties. Our attention was also drawn to the valuationreports in regard to the three properties mentionedearlier. It was urged that the said valuation reportshave been prepared by reputed valuers at the instanceof the Bank of China in connection with the loan 3transactions as a part of on-going annual exerciseundertaken by the lending Bank. If that be so,Saharas would do well to obtain a confirmation fromthe Bank of China to the effect that the valuationreports prepared in respect of the three propertiesmentioned above by CBRE and JLL, have been prepared atthe instance of the Bank of China and that the saidvaluation reports have been accepted by the Bank to becorrect. This could lend re-assurance to the Courtthat the value/stakes held by Saharas in theseproperties are sought to be transferred on the basisof the true market value of the said assets. Needfulshall be done expeditiously, but not later than oneweek from today.(NAVEEN KUMAR) (M.S. NEGI)COURT MASTER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
¦* 1 OUT TODAYITEM NO.1 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSIA Nos. 101-103 inCONTEMPT PETITION (C) NO. 412-413 OF 2012 IN Civil Appeal 9813/2011& 9833/2011 and CONT. PET.(C) NO. 260/2013 IN C.A. NO. 8643/2012S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for modification of order dated 21.11.2013 and officereport)Date: 29/05/2014 These applns. were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI (VACATION BENCH)For Petitioner(s) Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair, Adv. M/S. K.J. John & Co. Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh ,AdvFor Respondent(s) Dr. Rajeev Dhavan, Sr.Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. Jatin Pore, Adv. Mr. Sandeep Bajaj, Adv. Mrs.Shally Bhasin Maheshwari,Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi ,Adv UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Heard. Order reserved. In the course of the resumed hearing today, Dr. Dhawan, learned senior counsel for the applicant contended that apart from selling the immovable properties situated within the country `Saharas' propose to sell their stakes in three other properties situated outside the country. One of these three 2properties happens to be Grosvenor House in Londonwhile the other two namely, Plaza Hotel and DreamsDowntown hotel are in New York in the United States ofAmerica. Dr. Dhawan argued that the Saharas ownsubstantial stakes in these properties no matter thesame are subject to a charge in favour of the bank ofChina. The `shares' held by the Saharas, in thecompanies that own those properties argued Dr. Dhawanare also pledged with the Bank of China for repaymentof the outstanding loan to the said Bank. Accordingto Dr. Dhawan, the Saharas have already taken up thematter with the Bank of China proposing to dispose oftheir stakes in the said three properties to which the
Bank has given its, in principle, approval. It wassubmitted that this Court could apart from lifting theembargo on the sale of the moveable and immovableassets in India, vacate the same qua the said threeproperties to enable Saharas to comply with thedirections issued by this court. There is nothing on record before us to showthat any request as mentioned by Dr. Dhawan was madeby the Saharas to the Bank of China at any stage.Even so we see no reason why we should prevent Saharasfrom taking up the matter with the Bank of China forits permission/consent to the proposedtransfer/sale/alienation of their stakes in the equityof the companies that own the said properties. Dr.Dhawan submitted, on instructions, that an appropriatecommunication could subject to the order of this Courtbe addressed to the Bank of China by the Saharasseeking its approval to the proposed transfer of thestakes held by Saharas in the three propertiesmentioned above, subject to the repayment of the loanoutstanding against those properties. Dr. Dhawansubmitted that a copy of the communication addressedto the Bank of China and its response shall be placedon record before this Court along with an affidavitwithin one week from today. He further submitted thatapart from the correspondence that may be exchanged onthe subject between Saharas and the Bank of China, theBank of China will also be requested to confirm theamount that is outstanding towards the loan advancedby it in regard to each one of the three propertiesmentioned above to give a clear picture to this Courtas to the outstanding liability that remains to beliquidated by the Saharas qua the said properties. Our attention was also drawn to the valuationreports in regard to the three properties mentionedearlier. It was urged that the said valuation reportshave been prepared by reputed valuers at the instanceof the Bank of China in connection with the loan 3transactions as a part of on-going annual exerciseundertaken by the lending Bank. If that be so,Saharas would do well to obtain a confirmation fromthe Bank of China to the effect that the valuationreports prepared in respect of the three propertiesmentioned above by CBRE and JLL, have been prepared atthe instance of the Bank of China and that the saidvaluation reports have been accepted by the Bank to becorrect. This could lend re-assurance to the Courtthat the value/stakes held by Saharas in theseproperties are sought to be transferred on the basisof the true market value of the said assets. Needfulshall be done expeditiously, but not later than oneweek from today.(NAVEEN KUMAR) (M.S. NEGI)COURT MASTER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
R 1ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVIIAT 2 P.M. S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSINTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NOS. 101-103INCONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NOS. 412 & 413 OF 2012INCIVIL APPEAL NOS. 9813 & 9833 OF 2011ANDCONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 260 OF 2013INCIVIL APPEAL NO. 8643 OF 2012S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.& ORS. Respondent(s)(for modification of order dated 21.11.2013 and office report)Date: 19/05/2014 These IAs were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRIFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Meenakshi Chauhan, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair, Adv. for M/S. K.J. John & Co. Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh ,AdvFor Respondent(s) Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, Sr. Adv. Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Sr. Adv. Mr. S. Ganesh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal ,Adv Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Sandeep Bajaj, Adv. Mrs. Shally Bhasin Maheshwari,Adv. 2 Mr. Gautam Awasthi ,Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Heard in part. Post for continuation of arguments on 29th May,2014 at 10.30 A.M.
(Rajesh Dham) (M.S. Negi) Court Master Assistant Registrar
R 1ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVIIAT 2 P.M. S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSINTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NOS. 101-103INCONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NOS. 412 & 413 OF 2012INCIVIL APPEAL NOS. 9813 & 9833 OF 2011ANDCONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 260 OF 2013INCIVIL APPEAL NO. 8643 OF 2012S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.& ORS. Respondent(s)(for modification of order dated 21.11.2013 and office report)Date: 19/05/2014 These IAs were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRIFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Meenakshi Chauhan, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair, Adv. for M/S. K.J. John & Co. Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh ,AdvFor Respondent(s) Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, Sr. Adv. Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Sr. Adv. Mr. S. Ganesh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal ,Adv Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Sandeep Bajaj, Adv. Mrs. Shally Bhasin Maheshwari,Adv. 2 Mr. Gautam Awasthi ,Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Heard in part. Post for continuation of arguments on 29th May,2014 at 10.30 A.M.
(Rajesh Dham) (M.S. Negi) Court Master Assistant Registrar
R 1ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.2 SECTION XVIIAT 2 P.M. S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSINTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NOS. 101-103INCONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NOS. 412 & 413 OF 2012INCIVIL APPEAL NOS. 9813 & 9833 OF 2011ANDCONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 260 OF 2013INCIVIL APPEAL NO. 8643 OF 2012S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.& ORS. Respondent(s)(for modification of order dated 21.11.2013 and office report)Date: 19/05/2014 These IAs were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRIFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Meenakshi Chauhan, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair, Adv. for M/S. K.J. John & Co. Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh ,AdvFor Respondent(s) Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, Sr. Adv. Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Sr. Adv. Mr. S. Ganesh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal ,Adv Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Sandeep Bajaj, Adv. Mrs. Shally Bhasin Maheshwari,Adv. 2 Mr. Gautam Awasthi ,Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Heard in part. Post for continuation of arguments on 29th May,2014 at 10.30 A.M.
(Rajesh Dham) (M.S. Negi) Court Master Assistant Registrar
ü2 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 412 OF 2012 IN CIVIL APPEAL NO. 9813 OF 2011 |S.E.B.I. |......PETITIONER(S) || | ||VERSUS | ||SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORP. LTD. & ORS. |.....RESPONDENT(S)/ || |ALLEGED CONTEMNORS | W I T H CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 413 OF 2012 IN CIVIL APPEAL NO. 9833 OF 2011 IA NOS. 68-73 & 76-95 IN CIVIL APPEAL NO. 9813 OF 2011 IA NO.1 IN CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.... IN CIVIL APPEAL NO. 9813 OF 2011 A N D CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 260 OF 2013 IN CIVIL APPEAL NO. 8643 OF 2012 O R D E R We have gone through the fresh proposal filed on 25.03.2014. Though the same is not in compliance with our Order dated 31.08.2012 or the Order passed by the three-Judge Bench of this Court on 05.12.2012 in Civil Appeal No.8643 of 2012 and on 25.02.2013 in I.A. No.67 of 2013 in Civil Appeal No.9813 of 2011 with I.A. No.5 of 2013 in Civil Appeal No.9833 of 2011, we are inclined to grant interim bail to the contemnors who are detained by virtue of our order dated 04.03.2014, on the condition that they would pay the amount of Rs.10,000 crores - out of which Rs.5,000 crores to be deposited before this Court and for the balance a Bank Guarantee of a nationalized bank be furnished in favour of S.E.B.I. and be deposited before this Court. On compliance, the contemnors be released forthwith and the amount deposited be released to S.E.B.I. We make it clear that this order is passed in order to facilitate the contemnors to further raise the balance amount so as to comply with the Court's Orders mentioned above. ....................J. (K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN) ....................J.
(JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR) NEW DELHI, MARCH 26, 2014.ITEM NO.MM COURT NO.7 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSContempt Petition (Civil) No. 412 of 2012 inCivil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for stay and office report)WITHContempt Petition (Civil) NO. 413 of 2012 in C.A. No. 9833 of 2011(With appln. for stay and office report)IA Nos. 68-73 & 76-95 in Civil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011(With appln. for directions, appropriate orders, permission to fileand place addl. documents, clarification and office report)IA No.1 in Contempt Petition (Civil) No...... in C.A. No. 9813/2011(With appln. for permission to file contempt petition & office report)Contempt Petition (Civil) No. 260 of 2013 in CA No. 8643 of 2012Date: 26/03/2014 These Petitions and Applications were taken up today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHARFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. P.K. Jha, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair, Adv. Mr. Anuj Sarma, Adv. Mr. Debarshi Bhuyan, Adv. for M/s. K.J. John & Co. Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh, Adv.For Respondent(s) Mr. Ram Jethmalani, Sr. Adv. Dr. Rajeev Dhavan, Sr. Adv. Mr. S. Ganesh, Sr. Adv. Mr. C.A. Sundaram, Sr. Adv. Mr. P.H. Parekh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. ...2/- : 2 : Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, Adv. Mr. Satish Kishanchandani, Adv. Mr. Jatin Pore, Adv. Ms. Rohini Musa, Adv. Mr. Ashish Dixit, Adv. Mr. Karan S., Adv. Mr. Aditya Chopra, Adv. Mrs. Shally Bhasin Maheshwari, Adv.
UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R We have gone through the fresh proposal filed on 25.03.2014. Though the same is not in compliance with our Order dated 31.08.2012 or the Order passed by the three-Judge Bench of this Court on 05.12.2012 in Civil Appeal No.8643 of 2012 and on 25.02.2013 in I.A. No.67 of 2013 in Civil Appeal No.9813 of 2011 with I.A. No.5 of 2013 in Civil Appeal No.9833 of 2011, we are inclined to grant interim bail to the contemnors who are detained by virtue of our order dated 04.03.2014, on the condition that they would pay the amount of Rs.10,000 crores - out of which Rs.5,000 crores to be deposited before this Court and for the balance a Bank Guarantee of a nationalized bank be furnished in favour of S.E.B.I. and be deposited before this Court. On compliance, the contemnors be released forthwith and the amount deposited be released to S.E.B.I. We make it clear that this order is passed in order to facilitate the contemnors to further raise the balance amount so as to comply with the Court's Orders mentioned above. |(N.S.K. Kamesh) | |(Renuka Sadana) ||Court Master | |Court Master | (signed order is placed on the file)
¸ITEM NO.MM COURT NO.6 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSContempt Petition (Civil) No. 412 of 2012 inCivil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for stay and office report)WITHContempt Petition (Civil) NO. 413 of 2012 in C.A. No. 9833 of 2011(With appln. for stay and office report)IA Nos. 68-73 & 76-95 in Civil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011(With appln. for directions, appropriate orders, permission to file andplace addl. documents, clarification and office report)IA No.1 in Contempt Petition (Civil) No...... in C.A. No. 9813/2011(With appln. for permission to file contempt petition & office report)Contempt Petition (Civil) No. 260 of 2013 in CA No. 8643 of 2012Date: 07/03/2014 These Petitions and Applications werementioned today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHARFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Meenakshi Chauhan, Adv. Mr. Anuj Sarma, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair, Adv. For M/S. K.J. John & Co.,Adv. Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh ,AdvFor Respondent(s) Mr. C.A. Sundaram, Sr. Adv. Mr. Ravi Shankar Prasad, Sr.Adv. Ms. Rohini Musa, Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. Dr. Rajeev Dhavan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Satish Kishanchandani, Adv. Mr. Jatin Pore, Adv. Mr. Rakesh Dwivedi, Sr. Adv. Ms. Sanskriti Pathak, Adv. Mrs. Shally Bhasin Maheshwari,Adv. UPON being mentioned the Court made the following O R D E R Jail authorities are permitted to allow the detenues to meet their financial consultants and lawyers for discussion and finalization of the proposal, between 10.00 A.M. to 12.00 Noon.
|(Narendra Prasad) | |(Renuka Sadana) ||Court Master | |Court Master |
\236E IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 412 OF 2012 IN CIVIL APPEAL NO. 9813 OF 2011 |S.E.B.I. |......PETITIONER(S) || | ||VERSUS | ||SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORP. LTD. & ORS. |.....RESPONDENT(S)/ || |ALLEGED CONTEMNORS | W I T H CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 413 OF 2012 IN CIVIL APPEAL NO. 9833 OF 2011 IA NOS. 68-73 & 76-95 IN CIVIL APPEAL NO. 9813 OF 2011 IA NO.1 IN CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.... IN CIVIL APPEAL NO. 9813 OF 2011 A N D CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 260 OF 2013 IN CIVIL APPEAL NO. 8643 OF 2012 O R D E R 1. Contemnors are personally present in the Court, including the fifth respondent, who has been brought to the Court by the U.P. Police, in due execution of our non-bailable warrant of arrest. 2. We have heard the senior counsel on various occasions and perused the various documents, affidavits, etc. We have heard the learned counsel and contemnors today as well. We are fully convinced that the contemnors have not complied with our directions contained in the judgment dated August 31, 2012, as well as orders dated December 05, 2012 and February 25, 2013 passed in Civil Appeal No. 8643 of 2012 and I.A. No. 67 of 2013 by a three Judge Bench of this Court. 3. Sufficient opportunities have been given to the contemnors to fully comply with those orders and purge the contempt committed by them but, rather than availing of the same, they have adopted various dilatory tactics to delay the implementation of the orders of this Court. Non-compliance of the orders passed by this Court shakes the very foundation of our judicial system and undermines the rule of law, which we are bound to honour and protect. This is essential to maintain faith and confidence of the people of this country in the judiciary. 4. We have found that the contemnors have maintained an unreasonable stand throughout the proceedings before SEBI, SAT, High
Court and even before this Court. Reports/analysis filed by SEBI on 18.02.2014 make detailed reference to the submissions, documents, etc. furnished by the contemnors, which indicates that they are filing and making unacceptable statements and affidavits all through and even in the contempt proceedings. Documents and affidavits produced by the contemnors themselves would apparently falsify their refund theory and cast serious doubts about the existence of the so-called investors. All the fact finding authorities have opined that majority of investors do not exist. Preservation of market integrity is extremely important for economic growth of this country and for national interest. Maintaining investors' confidence requires market integrity and control of market abuse. Market abuse is a serious financial crime which undermines the very financial structure of this country and will make imbalance in wealth between haves and have nots. 5. We notice, on this day also, no proposal is forthcoming to honour the judgment of this Court dated 31st August, 2012 and the orders passed by this Court on December 05, 2012 and February 25, 2013 by the three Judge Bench. In such circumstances, in exercise of the powers conferred under Articles 129 and 142 of the Constitution of India, we order detention of all the contemnors, except Mrs. Vandana Bhargava (the fourth respondent) and send them to judicial custody at Delhi, till the next date of hearing. This concession is being extended towards the fourth respondent because she is a woman Director, and also, to enable the contemnors to be in a position to propose an acceptable solution for execution of our orders, by coordinating with the detenues. Mrs. Vandana Bhargava, who herself is one of the Directors, is permitted to be in touch with the rest of the contemnors and submit an acceptable proposal arrived at during their detention, so that the Court can pass appropriate orders. 6. List on March 11, 2014 at 2.00 p.m. All the contemnors be produced in Court on that date. Mrs. Vandana Bhargava, the fourth respondent, to appear on her own. However, liberty is granted for mentioning the matters for preponement of the date, if a concrete and acceptable proposal can be offered in the meantime. ..................J. (K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN) ..................J. (JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR) NEW DELHI, MARCH 04, 2014.ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.7 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSContempt Petition (Civil) No. 412 of 2012 inCivil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for stay and office report)
WITHContempt Petition (Civil) NO. 413 of 2012 in C.A. No. 9833 of 2011(With appln. for stay and office report)IA Nos. 68-73 & 76-95 in Civil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011(With appln. for directions, appropriate orders, permission to fileand place addl. documents, clarification and office report)IA No.1 in Contempt Petition (Civil) No...... in C.A. No. 9813/2011(With appln. for permission to file contempt petition & office report)Contempt Petition (Civil) No. 260 of 2013 in CA No. 8643 of 2012Date: 04/03/2014 These Petitions and Applications were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHARFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Meenakshi Chauhan, Adv. Mr. Anuj Sarma, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair, Adv. for M/s. K.J. John & Co. Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh, Adv.For Respondent(s) Mr. Ram Jethmalani, Sr. Adv. Mr. S. Ganesh, Sr.Adv. Mr. Ashish Dixit, Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. Satish Kishanchandani, Adv. Mr. Jatin Pore, Adv. ...2/- : 2 : Mr. C.A. Sundaram, Sr. Adv. Ms. Rohini Musa, Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Rakesh Dwivedi, Sr. Adv. Ms. Sanskriti Pathak, Adv. Dr. Rajeev Dhavan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Satish Kishanchandani, Adv. Mr. Jatin Pore, Adv. Mr. Ravi Shankar Prasad, Sr. Adv. Mrs. Shally Bhasin Maheshwari, Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List on March 11, 2014 at 2.00 p.m. in terms of the signed order. All the contemnors be produced in Court on that date. Mrs. Vandana Bhargava, the fourth respondent, to appear on her own. However, liberty is granted for mentioning the matters for preponement of the date, if a concrete and acceptable proposal can be offered in the meantime.
|(N.S.K. Kamesh) | |(Renuka Sadana) ||Court Master | |Court Master | (signed order is placed on the file)
Ü= IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 412 OF 2012 IN CIVIL APPEAL NO. 9813 OF 2011 |S.E.B.I. |......PETITIONER(S) || | ||VERSUS | ||SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORP. LTD. & ORS. |.....RESPONDENT(S)/ || |ALLEGED CONTEMNORS | W I T H CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 413 OF 2012 IN CIVIL APPEAL NO. 9833 OF 2011 IA NOS. 68-73 & 76-93 IN CIVIL APPEAL NO. 9813 OF 2011 IA NO.1 IN CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.... IN CIVIL APPEAL NO. 9813 OF 2011 A N D CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 260 OF 2013 IN CIVIL APPEAL NO. 8643 OF 2012 O R D E R This Court passed an order on February 20, 2014 directing the personal presence of the alleged contemnors and the Directors of the respondent companies today, i.e. on February 26, 2014 at 2.00 p.m. On our directions, Mr. Ashok Roy Choudhary, Mr. Ravi Shankar Dubey and Smt. Vandana Bhargava are present in Court today. Even though, Mr. Ram Jethmalani, learned senior counsel appearing for the alleged contemnors, made a mention yesterday, i.e. on February 25, 2014, before this Bench for dispensing with the personal presence of Mr. Subrata Roy Sahara, alleged contemnor No.5, that request was specifically turned down by this Court. ...2/- : 2 : Today, when the matter is taken up, same request was made by Mr. Jethmalani, by moving an application, which was supported by a medical certificate. The said medical certificate was issued by Sahara Hospital and, in our view, the factual position indicated therein does not solicit the exemption sought. Since, we have already declined to grant exemption from personal presence of alleged contemnor No.5 on February 25, 2014, we find no reason to accede to the renewal of the request made today. Accordingly, we issue non-bailable warrants of arrest qua Mr. Subrata Roy Sahara, alleged contemnor No.5. He shall be arrested and produced before this Court on March 04, 2014 at 2.00 p.m. The afore-mentioned Directors, who are present today, shall also remain present in Court on the next date.
Put up on March 04, 2014 at 2.00 p.m. ..................J. (K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN) ..................J. (JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR) NEW DELHI, FEBRUARY 26, 2014.ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.7 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSContempt Petition (Civil) No. 412 of 2012 inCivil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for stay and office report)WITHContempt Petition (Civil) NO. 413 of 2012 in C.A. No. 9833 of 2011(With appln. for stay and office report)IA Nos. 68-73 & 76-93 in Civil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011(With appln. for directions, appropriate orders, permission to fileand place addl. documents, clarification and office report)IA No.1 in Contempt Petition (Civil) No...... in C.A. No. 9813/2011(With appln. for permission to file contempt petition & office report)Contempt Petition (Civil) No. 260 of 2013 in CA No. 8643 of 2012Date: 26/02/2014 These Petitions and Applications were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHARFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Meenakshi Chauhan, Adv. Mr. Anuj Sarma, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair, Adv. for M/s. K.J. John & Co. Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh, Adv.For Respondent(s) Mr. Ram Jethmalani, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Satish Kishanchandani, Adv. Mr. Jatin Pore, Adv. Mr. Ashish Dixit, Adv.
...2/- : 2 : Mr. C.A. Sundaram, Sr. Adv. Ms. Rohini Musa, Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Rakesh Dwivedi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Satish Kishanchandani, Adv. Mr. Jatin Pore, Adv. Mrs. Shally Bhasin Maheshwari, Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R This Court passed an order on February 20, 2014 directing the personal presence of the alleged contemnors and the Directors of the respondent companies today, i.e. on February 26, 2014 at 2.00 p.m. On our directions, Mr. Ashok Roy Choudhary, Mr. Ravi Shankar Dubey and Smt. Vandana Bhargava are present in Court today. Even though, Mr. Ram Jethmalani, learned senior counsel appearing for the alleged contemnors, made a mention yesterday, i.e. on February 25, 2014, before this Bench for dispensing with the personal presence of Mr. Subrata Roy Sahara, alleged contemnor No.5, that request was specifically turned down by this Court. Today, when the matter is taken up, same request was made by Mr. Jethmalani, by moving an application, which was supported by a medical certificate. The said medical certificate was issued by Sahara Hospital and, in our view, the factual position indicated therein does not solicit the exemption sought. Since, we have already declined to grant exemption from personal presence of alleged contemnor No.5 on February 25, 2014, we find no reason to accede to the renewal of the request made today. ...3/- : 3 : Accordingly, we issue non-bailable warrants of arrest qua Mr. Subrata Roy Sahara, alleged contemnor No.5. He shall be arrested and produced before this Court on March 04, 2014 at 2.00 p.m. The afore-mentioned Directors, who are present today, shall also remain present in Court on the next date. Put up on March 04, 2014 at 2.00 p.m. |(N.S.K. Kamesh) | |(Renuka Sadana) ||Court Master | |Court Master | (signed order is placed on the file)
ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.7 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSContempt Petition (Civil) No. 412 of 2012 inCivil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for stay and office report)WITHContempt Petition (Civil) NO. 413 of 2012 in C.A. No. 9833 of 2011(With appln. for stay and office report)IA Nos. 68-73 & 76-89 in Civil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011(With appln. for directions, appropriate orders, permission to fileand place addl. documents, clarification and office report)IA No.1 in Contempt Petition (Civil) No...... in C.A. No. 9813/2011(With appln. for permission to file contempt petition & office report)Contempt Petition (Civil) No. 260 of 2013 in CA No. 8643 of 2012Date: 20/02/2014 These Petitions and Applications were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHARFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Ms. Meenakshi Chauhan, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair, Adv. for M/s. K.J. John & Co. Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh, Adv.For Respondent(s) Mr. Ram Jethmalani, Sr. Adv. Mr. S. Ganesh, Sr. Adv. Mr. K.K. Lahiri, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Satish Kishanchandani, Adv. Mr. Jatin Pore, Adv. Mr. Parag Kandhar, Adv. Mr. C.A. Sundaram, Sr. Adv. Ms. Rohini Musa, Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Mrs. Shally Bhasin Maheshwari, Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Heard Mr. Ram Jethmalani and Mr. C.A. Sundaram, learned
senior counsel appearing for the alleged contemnors and Mr. Arvind P. Datar, learned senior counsel appearing for SEBI. In view of the conflicting stands taken by the senior counsel appearing for the alleged contemnors and the defiant and non-cooperative attitude adopted by the contemnors in honouring the judgment dated August 31, 2012, passed by this Court as well as orders dated December 05, 2012 and February 25, 2013 passed in Civil Appeal No. 8643 of 2012 and IA No. 67 of 2013 by a three Judge Bench of this Court, we direct the personal presence of the alleged contemnors and the Directors of the respondent companies in Court on February 26, 2014 at 2.00 p.m., on which date the matter will be next taken up. |(N.S.K. Kamesh) | |(Renuka Sadana) ||Court Master | |Court Master |
NITEM NO.301 COURT NO.7 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSContempt Petition (Civil) No. 412 of 2012 inCivil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for stay and office report)WITHContempt Petition (Civil) No. 413 of 2012 in CA No. 9833/2011(With appln. for stay and office report)IA Nos. 68-73 and 76-89 in CA No. 9813/2011(With appln. for directions, appropriate orders, permission to fileaddl. documents on record, clarification and office report)IA No.1 in Contempt Petition (C) No..... in CA No. 9813/2011(Appln. seeking permission to file contempt petition and office report)Contempt Petition (Civil) No. 260 of 2013 in CA No. 8643/2012Date: 11/02/2014 These Petitions and applications were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHARFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Mr. Gaurav nair, Adv. for M/s. K.J. John & Co.For Respondent(s)CC 412/2013 Mr. Ram Jethmalani, Sr. Adv.R-1 Mr. S. Ganesh, Sr. Adv. Mr. K.K. Lahiri, Adv. Mr. Ashish Dixit, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Satish Kishanchandani, Adv. Mr. Jatin Pore, Adv. Mr. Parag Kandhar, Adv. ...2/- : 2 :CC 413/2013 Mr. Uday U. Lalit, Sr. Adv. Mr. K.K. Lahiri, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Satish Kishanchandani, Adv. Mr. Jatin Pore, Adv. Mr. Parag Kandhar, Adv.CC 412/2012 Mr. C.A. Sundaram, Sr. Adv.R-5 Ms. Rohini Musa, Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv.
UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Mr. Ram Jethmalani, learned senior counsel appearing for respondent No.1, submitted that he is not ready to argue the matter today as he is unwell. Consequently, the matter is peremptorily posted for February 20, 2014 at 2.00 p.m. |(N.S.K. Kamesh) | |(Usha Sharma) ||Court Master | |Court Master |
6&ITEM NO.301(P.H.) COURT NO.7 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSContempt Petition (Civil) No. 412 of 2012 inCivil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for stay and office report)WITHContempt Petition (Civil) No. 413 of 2012 in CA No. 9833/2011(With appln. for stay and office report)IA Nos. 68-73 and 76-89 in CA No. 9813/2011(With appln. for directions, appropriate orders, permission to fileaddl. documents on record, clarification and office report)IA No.1 in Contempt Petition (C) No..... in CA No. 9813/2011(Appln. seeking permission to file contempt petition and office report)Contempt Petition (Civil) No. 260 of 2013 in CA No. 8643/2012Date: 28/01/2014 These matters were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHARFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P. Datar,Sr.Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal,Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman,Adv. Ms. Meenakshi Chauhan,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair,Adv. For M/S. K.J. John & Co. Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh,Adv.For Respondent(s) Mr. Ram Jethmalani,Sr.Adv. Mr. A. Dixit,Adv. Mr. K.K. Lahiri, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Satish Kishanchandani, Adv. Mr. Jatin Pore, Adv. Mr. C.A. Sundram,Sr.Adv. Ms. Rohini Musa,Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary,Adv. Mr. Rakesh Dwivedi, Sr. Adv. Mrs. Shally Bhasin Maheshwari,Adv. Mr. Gagan Gupta,Adv. Ms. Sumita Hazarika,Adv. Ms. Manju Jetley,Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Heard Mr. Ram Jethmalani, learned senior counsel and Mr. Arvind P. Datar, learned senior counsel.
Mr. Datar submitted that the Saharas have not disclosed the details as to when the refund was made. Reference was made to pages 6 to 9 of the reply affidavit filed today. Mr. Datar further submitted that the SEBI requires an explanation from Saharas with regard to the payments made on behalf of Sahara India Real Estate Corporation Ltd. (SIRECL) (partnership firm) by the following firms, as mentioned below:- Rupees (In Crores) 1. Sahara Credit Co-operative Society Ltd. 13,366.18 2. Sahara India Commercial Corporation Limited 4384.00 3. Sahara Q Shop 2258.32 4. Ketak City Homes Ltd. 19.43 5. Kirit City Homes Ltd. 44.05 Similarly, SEBI requires Saharas to show the following payments made on behalf of Sahara Housing Investment Corporation Ltd. (SHICL) (partnership firm), by the following firms, as mentioned below :- Rupees (In Crores) 1. SICCL 2479.00 2. Sahara Q Shop 2411.90 Further, the Saharas will also provide the bank statements of the above firms showing when the amount was paid to the partnership firms and subsequently when and how partnership firm made the disbursement, as sought for by the SEBI. Mr. Ram Jethmalani, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that he will examine the same and come out with a response within a week. Post on 11.02.2014 at 2.00 P.M. |(NARENDRA PRASAD) | |(SHARDA KAPOOR) ||COURT MASTER | |COURT MASTER | 1
ÂITEM NO.301 COURT NO.7 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSContempt Petition (Civil) No. 412 of 2012 inCivil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for stay and office report)WITHContempt Petition (Civil) No. 413 of 2012 in CA No. 9833/2011(With appln. for stay and office report)IA Nos. 68-73 and 76-89 in CA No. 9813/2011(With appln. for directions, appropriate orders, permission to fileaddl. documents on record, clarification and office report)IA No.1 in Contempt Petition (C) No..... in CA No. 9813/2011(Appln. seeking permission to file contempt petition and office report)Contempt Petition (Civil) No. 260 of 2013 in CA No. 8643/2012Date: 09/01/2014 These Petitions and applications were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHARFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Ms. Meenakshi Chauhan, Adv. Mr. Gaurav nair, Adv. for M/s. K.J. John & Co.For Respondent(s) Mr. C.A. Sundaram, Sr. Adv. Ms. Rohini Musa, Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Mr. U.U. Lalit, Sr. Adv. Mr. K.K. Lahiri, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Jatin Pore, Adv. Mr. Parag Kandhar, Adv. ...2/- : 2 : Ms. Shally Bhasin Maheshwari, Adv. Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh, Adv. Mr. Gagan Gupta, Adv. Ms. Sumita Hazarika, Adv. Ms. Manju Jetley, Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R
Heard counsel on either side. Mr. C.A. Sundaram, learned senior counsel appearing for one of the alleged contemnors, submitted that earlier this Court on December 11, 2013 has only reiterated the submission made by Mr. Arvind Datar, learned senior counsel appearing for SEBI, that they did not disclose the source from which they got money for repayment, despite SEBI's letter dated May 28, 2013. Mr. Sundaram is right in his submission. However, we feel that it would be appropriate to give a direction of the nature stated above. Accordingly, we direct the alleged contemnors to disclose the complete details and source from which they repaid the amount to the investors as also the manner of making payments. They shall also disclose the information which SEBI has sought from them from time to time. Such information shall be provided to SEBI and also be filed in this Court by January 23, 2014. Put up on January 28, 2014 at 2.00 p.m. In the meantime, SEBI shall verify the information provided to it by the alleged contemnors. |(N.S.K. Kamesh) | |(Renuka Sadana) ||Court Master | |Court Master |
rITEM NO.301 COURT NO.7 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSI.A. NOS.86-87 in CONTMPT PETITION (C) NO. 412 & 413 OF 2012in Civil Appeal Nos.9813/2011 AND 9833/2011S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for directions and office report)Date: 02/01/2014 These matters were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHARFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Pratap Venugopal,Adv. For M/S. K.J. John & Co. Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh,Adv.For Respondent(s) Mr. C.A. Sundram,Sr.Adv. Ms. Rohini Musa,Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Malhotra,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. Mrs. Shally Bhasin Maheshwari,Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List these I.As. on 09.01.2014 along with the contempt petitions. |(NARENDRA PRASAD) | |(RENUKA SADANA) ||COURT MASTER | |COURT MASTER | 1
ÞITEM NO.MM-2 COURT NO.5 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSI.A. ____ IN CONTEMPT PETITION (C) NOs. 412 & 413 OF 2012 IN Civil Appeal 9813 & 9833/2011S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(For Directions)Date: 17/12/2013 This I.A. was MENTIONED today before HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHARCORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATNAIK HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHARFor Petitioner(s) M/S. K.J. John & Co., Advs. Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh, Adv.For Respondent(s) Mrs. Shally Bhasin Maheshwari, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv.For Applicant Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. UPON being mentioned by the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List on the first or second working day in January, 2014. (G. SUDHAKARA RAO) (SHARDA KAPOOR) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER
\200 ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.6 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSContempt Petition (Civil) No. 412 of 2012 inCivil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for stay and office report)WITHContempt Petition (Civil) No. 413 of 2012 in CA No. 9833/2011(With appln. for stay and office report)IA Nos. 68-69, 70-71, 72-73 and 76-77, 78-79, 80-81 in CA No. 9813/2011(With appln. for directions, appropriate orders, permission to fileaddl. documents on record and office report)IA No.1 in Contempt Petition (C) No..... in CA No. 9813/2011(Appln. seeking permission to file contempt petition and office report)Contempt Petition (Civil) No. 260 of 2013 in CA No. 8643/2012Date: 11/12/2013 These Petitions were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHARFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Ms. Meenakshi Chauhan, Adv. Mr. Gaurav nair, Adv. for M/s. K.J. John & Co.For Respondent(s) Mr. C.A. Sundaram, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Malhotra, Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Rakesh Dwivedi, Sr. Adv. Ms. Shally Bhasin Maheshwari, Adv. Mr. C.A. Sundaram, Sr. Adv. Mr. K.K. Lahiri, Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv. ...2/- : 2 : Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Satish Kishan Chandani, Adv. Mr. Jatin Pore, Adv. Mr. S. Ganesh, Sr. Adv. Mr. K.K. Lahiri, Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Satish Kishan Chandani, Adv. Mr. Jatin Pore, Adv. Mr. Vishwapal Singh, Adv.
Ms. Manju Jetley, Adv. Mr. Gagan Gupta, Adv. Ms. Sumita Hazarika, Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Heard counsel on either side. Following our orders dated 28.10.2013, 01.11.2013 and 21.11.2013, Mr. C.A. Sundaram, learned senior counsel, has taken us through Annexure-A, filed along with IA No.82 of 2013, which gives details of various properties which the alleged contemnors have agreed to offer to SEBI. Reference was specifically made to properties mentioned at Item Nos. 68, 69 and 70, which, according to Mr. Sundaram, would fetch a value of more than `11,000 crores. Mr. Arvind Datar, learned senior counsel appearing for the SEBI, prayed for some time to verify the same as well as the valuation reports filed along with the IA in support of that prayer. However, he submitted that if it is the stand of the alleged contemnors that they had refunded the amounts {`17443 crores approximately in case of SIRECL and `5442 crores approximately in case of SHICL}, ...3/- : 3 : then they should produce the relevant records, duly certified by a competent authority which is acceptable in a Court of law, indicating the sources from which they got the money for repayment, as requested vide SEBI's letter dated May 28, 2013. Put up on January 09, 2014 at 2.00 p.m. |(N.S.K. Kamesh) | |(Renuka Sadana) ||Court Master | |Court Master |
ÐITEM NO.301 (P.H.) COURT NO.7 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSCONTEMPT PETITION (C) NO. 412 OF 2012 IN Civil Appeal 9813/2011S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for stay and office report)WITHContempt Petition (Civil) No. 413 of 2012 in CA No. 9833/2011(With appln. for stay and office report)IA Nos. 68-69, 70-71, 72-73 and 76-77, 78-79, 80-81 in CA No. 9813/2011(With appln. for directions, appropriate orders, permission to fileand place addl. documents, permission to file addl. documents and officereport)IA No.1 in Contempt Petition (C) No..... in CA No. 9813/2011(Appln. seeking permission to file contempt petition and office report)Contempt Petition (Civil) No. 260 of 2013 in CA No. 8643/2012Date: 21/11/2013 This Petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHARFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P. Datar,Sr.Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman,Adv. Ms. Meenakshi Chauhan,Adv. Mr. Purushottam Kumar Jha,Adv. for M/s. K.J. John & Co.For Respondent(s) Mr. C.A. Sundaram, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Malhotra,Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. (In CP.412/2012 & CP.413/12) Mr. K.K. Lehri, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh,Adv. Mr. Satish Kishanchandani,Adv. Mr. Aditya Chopra, Adv. Mr. Sandeep Bajaj, Adv. (In CP.412, 413/2012 & CP.260/13) Mrs. Shally Bhasin Maheshwari,Adv. (In CP.412/2012 & CP.413/12) Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh,Adv. Mr. Irshad Ahmad,Adv. Mr. Gagan Gupta,Adv.
Ms. Sumita Hazarika,Adv. Ms. Manju Jetley,Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R We are convinced that the order dated 28.10.2013 passed by this Court has not been complied with in its letter and spirit. In such circumstances, we direct that the Sahara Group of Companies shall not part with any movable and immovable properties until further orders. We further direct that all the alleged contemnors shall not leave the country without the permission of this Court. List on 11.12.2013 at 2.00 P.M., for further arguments. |(NARENDRA PRASAD) | |(RENUKA SADANA) ||COURT MASTER | |COURT MASTER | 1
jITEM NO.301 (P.H.) COURT NO.7 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSContempt Petition (Civil) No. 412 of 2012 inCivil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for stay and office report)WITHContempt Petition (Civil) No. 413 of 2012 in CA No. 9833/2011(With appln. for stay and office report)IA Nos. 68-69, 70-71, 72-73 and 76-77, 78-79, 80-81 in CA No. 9813/2011(With appln. for directions, appropriate orders, permission to file & placeaddl. documents and office report)IA No.1 in Contempt Petition (C) No..... in CA No. 9813/2011(Appln. seeking permission to file contempt petition and office report)Contempt Petition (Civil) No. 260 of 2013 in CA No. 8643/2012Date: 20/11/2013 These Petitions were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHARFor the parties Mr. Arvind P. Datar,Sr.Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal,Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman,Adv. Ms. Meenakshi Chauhan,Adv. Mr. Anuj Sarma,Adv. For M/s. K.J. John & Co. Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh,Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Malhotra,Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary,Adv. Ms. Rohini Musa,Adv. Mr. Aditya Chopra,Adv. Mr. K.K. Lahiri,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan,Adv. Mr. Satish Kishanchandani,Adv. Mr. Simranjeet singh,Adv. Mr. Rakesh Dwivedi, Sr. Adv. Mrs. Shally Bhasin Maheshwari,Adv. Mr. Gagan Gupta,Adv. Ms. Sumita Hazarika,Adv. Ms. Manju Jetley,Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List on 21.11.2013.
To be taken up after the hearing in R.P.(Crl) No.112/2013 in SLP(Crl) No.3502/2002, listed before a Bench comprising Hon'ble Mr. Justice R.M. Lodha and Hon'ble Mr. Justice K.S. Radhakrishnan, is over. |(NARENDRA PRASAD) | |(RENUKA SADANA) ||COURT MASTER | |COURT MASTER | 1
jITEM NO.301 (P.H.) COURT NO.7 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSContempt Petition (Civil) No. 412 of 2012 inCivil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for stay and office report)WITHContempt Petition (Civil) No. 413 of 2012 in CA No. 9833/2011(With appln. for stay and office report)IA Nos. 68-69, 70-71, 72-73 and 76-77, 78-79, 80-81 in CA No. 9813/2011(With appln. for directions, appropriate orders, permission to file & placeaddl. documents and office report)IA No.1 in Contempt Petition (C) No..... in CA No. 9813/2011(Appln. seeking permission to file contempt petition and office report)Contempt Petition (Civil) No. 260 of 2013 in CA No. 8643/2012Date: 20/11/2013 These Petitions were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHARFor the parties Mr. Arvind P. Datar,Sr.Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal,Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman,Adv. Ms. Meenakshi Chauhan,Adv. Mr. Anuj Sarma,Adv. For M/s. K.J. John & Co. Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh,Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Malhotra,Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary,Adv. Ms. Rohini Musa,Adv. Mr. Aditya Chopra,Adv. Mr. K.K. Lahiri,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan,Adv. Mr. Satish Kishanchandani,Adv. Mr. Simranjeet singh,Adv. Mr. Rakesh Dwivedi, Sr. Adv. Mrs. Shally Bhasin Maheshwari,Adv. Mr. Gagan Gupta,Adv. Ms. Sumita Hazarika,Adv. Ms. Manju Jetley,Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List on 21.11.2013.
To be taken up after the hearing in R.P.(Crl) No.112/2013 in SLP(Crl) No.3502/2002, listed before a Bench comprising Hon'ble Mr. Justice R.M. Lodha and Hon'ble Mr. Justice K.S. Radhakrishnan, is over. |(NARENDRA PRASAD) | |(RENUKA SADANA) ||COURT MASTER | |COURT MASTER | 1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION IA NO.4 IN CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 260 OF 2013 IN CIVIL APPEAL NO. 8643 OF 2012 |SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPORATION & ANR. |......APPLICANT(S) || | ||VERSUS | ||SECURITIES & EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA |.....RESPONDENT(S) | O R D E R We have heard Mr. C.A. Sundaram, learned senior advocate appearing for the applicants. For the reasons indicated in para 4 of the application, we make it clear that it is open for the alleged contemnor No.5 in Contempt Petition (Civil) Nos. 412 and 413 of 2012 to go abroad, but, in the event of non-compliance of the directions contained in the order dated October 28, 2013, he shall immediately return back and be present in the country before the expiry of the period of three weeks, as indicated in the said order. With the aforesaid observation, IA No.4 is disposed of. ..................J. (K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN) ..................J. (JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR) NEW DELHI, NOVEMBER 01, 2013.ITEM NO.301 CHAMBER MATTER SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSIA No.4 inContempt Petition (Civil) No. 260/2013 in Civil Appeal No. 8643/2012SAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORP. LTD. & ANR. Applicant(s) VERSUSSECURITIES & EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA Respondent(s)Date: 01/11/2013 This Application was called on for hearing today.CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHARFor Applicant(s) Mr. C.A. Sundaram, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R IA No.4 is disposed of in terms of the signed order. |(N.S.K. Kamesh) | |(Renuka Sadana) ||Court Master | |Court Master | (signed order is placed on the file)
(ITEM NO.MM1 COURT NO.8 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSI.A. NO............... (Appln. for modification/clarification) inContempt Petition (Civil) No. 412 of 2012 inCivil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for stay and office report)WITHContempt Petition (Civil) No. 413 of 2012 in CA No. 9833/2011(With appln. for stay and office report)IA Nos. 68-69, 70-71, 72-73 and 76-77, 78-79, 80-81 in CA No. 9813/2011(With appln. for directions, appropriate orders, permission to fileaddl. documents on record and office report)IA No.1 in Contempt Petition (C) No..... in CA No. 9813/2011(Appln. seeking permission to file contempt petition and office report)Contempt Petition (Civil) No. 260 of 2013 in CA No. 8643/2012(HEARD BY HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN ANDHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR)Date: 31/10/2013 This matter was mentioned today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRIFor Petitioner(s) M/S. K.J. John & Co.,AOR Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh,AORFor Respondent(s) Mr. C.A. Sundaram,Sr.Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,AOR Mrs. Shally Bhasin Maheshwari,AOR Mr. Gautam Awasthi,AOR UPON being mentioned the Court made the following O R D E R List on 01.11.2013 in Chambers at 1.30 P.M. |(NARENDRA PRASAD) | |(RENUKA SADANA) ||COURT MASTER | |COURT MASTER |
¾ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.7 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSContempt Petition (Civil) No. 412 of 2012 inCivil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for stay and office report)WITHContempt Petition (Civil) No. 413 of 2012 in CA No. 9833/2011(With appln. for stay and office report)IA Nos. 68-69, 70-71, 72-73 and 76-77, 78-79, 80-81 in CA No. 9813/2011(With appln. for directions, appropriate orders, permission to fileaddl. documents on record and office report)IA No.1 in Contempt Petition (C) No..... in CA No. 9813/2011(Appln. seeking permission to file contempt petition and office report)Contempt Petition (Civil) No. 260 of 2013 in CA No. 8643/2012Date: 28/10/2013 These Petitions were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHARFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Ms. Meenakshi Chauhan, Adv. Mr. Anuj Sarma, Adv. for M/s. K.J. John & Co.For Respondent(s) Mr. C.A. Sundaram, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Malhotra, Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Rakesh Dwivedi, Sr. Adv. Ms. Shally Bhasin Maheshwari, Adv. Mr. K.K. Lahiri, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. ...2/- : 2 : Mr. Satish Kishanchandani, Adv. Mr. Jatin Pore, Adv. Mr. Vishwapal Singh, Adv. Ms. Manju Jetley, Adv. Mr. Gagan Gupta, Adv. Ms. Sumita Hazarika, Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R
Mr. C.A. Sundaram, learned senior counsel appearing for respondent No.5 (alleged contemnor), brought to our notice letter dated October 17, 2013 received from the Managing Director and CEO of the PNB Investment Services Limited. The same is taken on record and is marked as 'Annexure-A'. Mr. Sundaram, on the basis of the said letter and on instructions received from the Sahara Group of Companies, submitted that the alleged contemnors are willing to make available to SEBI the original title deeds of unencumbered properties, worth `20,000 crores, along with proper valuation reports, within a period of three weeks from today. SEBI, in turn, will examine the same and make their response, which shall be considered by this Court on the next date of hearing. Till the above direction is complied with to the satisfaction of SEBI, the alleged contemnors (respondents) shall not leave the country without the permission of this Court. Post on November 20, 2013 at 2.00 p.m. |(N.S.K. Kamesh) | |(Renuka Sadana) ||Court Master | |Court Master |
vITEM NO.301 (P.H.) COURT NO.8 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSCONTEMPT PETITION (C) NO. 412 OF 2012 IN Civil Appeal 9813/2011S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for stay and office report)WITHContempt Petition (Civil) No. 413 of 2012 in CA No. 9833/2011(With appln. for stay and office report)IA Nos. 68-69, 70-71, 72-73 and 76-77, 78-79, 80-81 in CA No. 9813/2011(With appln. for directions, appropriate orders, permission to fileand place addl. documents, permission to file addl. documents and officereport)IA No.1 in Contempt Petition (C) No..... in CA No. 9813/2011(Appln. seeking permission to file contempt petition and office report)Contempt Petition (Civil) No. 260 of 2013 in CA No. 8643/2012Date: 04/10/2013 These matters were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHARFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P. Datar,Sr.Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman,Adv. Ms. Meenakshi Chauhan,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair, Adv. for M/s. K.J. John & Co.For Respondent(s) Mr. K.K. Lehri, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh,Adv. Mr. Satish Kishanchandani,Adv. Mr. Jatin Pore, Adv. Mr. Parag Kandhar, Adv. (In CP.412/2012 & CP.260/13) Mr. Rajiv Dhawan, Sr. Adv. Mr. K.K. Lehri, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh,Adv. Mr. Satish Kishanchandani,Adv. Mr. Jatin Pore, Adv. Mr. Parag Kandhar, Adv. (In CP.413/2012 & CP.260/13) Mr. Rakesh Dwivedi, Sr. Adv. Mrs. Shally Bhasin Maheshwari,Adv.
Ms. S. Pathak, Adv. (In CP.412/2012 & CP.413/12) Mr. C.A. Sundaram, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. (In CP.412/2012 & CP.413/12) Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh,Adv. Mr. Irshad Ahmad,Adv. Mr. Gagan Gupta,Adv. Ms. Sumita Hazarika,Adv. Ms. Manju Jetley,Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List on 28.10.2013 at 2.00 P.M, as part heard. |(NARENDRA PRASAD) | |(RENUKA SADANA) ||COURT MASTER | |COURT MASTER | 1
˜ITEM NO.301 (P.H.) COURT NO.8 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSCONTEMPT PETITION (C) NO. 412 OF 2012 IN Civil Appeal 9813/2011S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for stay and office report)WITHContempt Petition (Civil) No. 413 of 2012 in CA No. 9833/2011(With appln. for stay and office report)IA Nos. 68-69, 70-71, 72-73 and 76-77, 78-79, 80-81 in CA No. 9813/2011(With appln. for directions, appropriate orders, permission to fileand place addl. documents, permission to file addl. documents and officereport)IA No.1 in Contempt Petition (C) No..... in CA No. 9813/2011(Appln. seeking permission to file contempt petition and office report)Contempt Petition (Civil) No. 260 of 2013 in CA No. 8643/2012Date: 16/09/2013 These matters were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHARFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P. Datar,Sr.Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman,Adv. Ms. Meenakshi Chauhan,Adv. Mr. Anuj Sarma,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair, Adv. Mr. Debrish Bhuyan, Adv. for M/s. K.J. John & Co.For Respondent(s) Mr. S. Ganesh, Sr. Adv. Mr. K.K. Lehri, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh,Adv. Mr. Satish Kishanchandani,Adv. Mr. Jatin Pore, Adv. Mr. Parag Kandhar, Adv. (In CP.412/2012 & CP.260/13) Mr. Rajiv Dhawan, Sr. Adv. Mr. K.K. Lehri, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh,Adv. Mr. Satish Kishanchandani,Adv. Mr. Jatin Pore, Adv. Mr. Parag Kandhar, Adv.
(In CP.413/2012 & CP.260/13) Mr. Rakesh Dwivedi, Sr. Adv. Mrs. Shally Bhasin Maheshwari,Adv. Ms. S. Pathak, Adv. Mr. Sameer Malik,Adv. (In CP.412/2012 & CP.413/12) Mr. C.A. Sundaram, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. (In CP.412/2012 & CP.413/12) Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh,Adv. Mr. Irshad Ahmad,Adv. Mr. Gagan Gupta,Adv. Ms. Sumita Hazarika,Adv. Ms. Manju Jetley,Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List on 04.10.2013 at 2.00 P.M, as part heard. |(NARENDRA PRASAD) | |(RENUKA SADANA) ||COURT MASTER | |COURT MASTER | 1
¼ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.8 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSCONTEMPT PETITION (C) NO. 412 OF 2012 IN Civil Appeal NO.9813/2011S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for stay and office report)WITHContempt Petition (Civil) No. 413 of 2012 in CA No. 9833/2011(With appln. for stay and office report)IA Nos. 68-69, 70-71, 72-73 and 76-77, 78-79, 80-81 in CA No. 9813/2011(With appln. for directions, appropriate orders, permission to fileaddl. documents on record and office report)IA No.1 in Contempt Petition (C) No..... in CA No. 9813/2011(Appln. seeking permission to file contempt petition and office report)Contempt Petition (Civil) No. 260 of 2013 in CA No. 8643/2012Date: 02/09/2013 These Petitions were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHARFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman,Adv. Ms. Meenakshi Chauhan,Adv. Mr. Varun Singh,Adv. Mr. Anuj Sarma,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair, Adv. Mr. Debrish Bhuyan, Adv. for M/s. K.J. John & Co.For Respondent(s) Mr. Ram Jethmalani, Sr. Adv. Mr. S. Ganesh, Sr. Adv. Mr. K.K. Lehri, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Satish Kishanchandani,Adv. Mr. Jatin Pore, Adv. Mr. Parag Kandhar, Adv. (In CP.412/2012 & CP.260/13) Mr. Rajiv Dhawan, Sr. Adv. Mr. K.K. Lehri, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Satish Kishanchandani,Adv. Mr. Jatin Pore, Adv. Mr. Parag Kandhar, Adv. (In CP.413/2012 & CP.260/13) Mr. Rakesh Dwivedi, Sr. Adv. Mrs. Shally Bhasin Maheshwari,Adv. Ms. S. Pathak, Adv.
Ms. Sanskriti Pathak,Adv. (In CP.412/2012 & CP.413/12) Mr. C.A. Sundaram, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. (In CP.412/2012 & CP.413/12) Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh,Adv. Mr. Irshad Ahmad,Adv. Mr. Gagan Gupta,Adv. Ms. Sumita Hazarika,Adv. Ms. Manju Jetley,Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List on 16.09.2013 at 2.00 P.M, as part heard. |(NARENDRA PRASAD) | |(RENUKA SADANA) ||COURT MASTER | |COURT MASTER |
8ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.8 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSContempt Petition (Civil) No. 412 of 2012 inCivil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for stay and office report)WITHContempt Petition (Civil) No. 413 of 2012 in CA No. 9833/2011(With appln. for stay and office report)IA Nos. 68-69, 70-71, 72-73 and 76-77, 78-79, 80-81 in CA No. 9813/2011(With appln. for directions, appropriate orders, permission to fileaddl. documents on record and office report)IA No.1 in Contempt Petition (C) No..... in CA No. 9813/2011(Appln. seeking permission to file contempt petition and office report)Contempt Petition (Civil) No. 260 of 2013 in CA No. 8643/2012Date: 26/08/2013 These Petitions were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHARFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Ms. Meenakshi Chauhan, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair, Adv. for M/s. K.J. John & Co.For Respondent(s) Mr. Ram Jethmalani, Sr. Adv. Mr. S. Ganesh, Sr. Adv. Mr. K.K. Lahiri, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Satish Kishanchandani, Adv. Mr. Jatin Pore, Adv. Mr. Parag Kandhar, Adv. ...2/- : 2 : Mr. C.A. Sundaram, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Malhotra, Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Rakesh Dwivedi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Shally Bhasin Maheshwari, Adv. Ms. S. Pathak, Adv. Mr. Sameer Malik, Adv. Mr. Rajiv Dhawan, Sr. Adv. Mr. K.K. Lahiri, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv.
Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Satish Kishanchandani, Adv. Mr. Jatin Pore, Adv. Mr. Vishwapal Singh, Adv. Ms. Manju Jetley, Adv. Mr. Gagan Gupta, Adv. Ms. Sumita Hazarika, Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Mr. Ram Jethmalani, learned senior advocate for the respondents, resumed his arguments at 2.00 p.m. and was on his legs when the Court rose for the day. The matter remained part-heard. For further arguments, to come up on September 02, 2013 at 2.00 p.m. |(N.S.K. Kamesh) | |(Renuka Sadana) ||Court Master | |Court Master |
àITEM NO.301 COURT NO.8 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSCONTEMPT PETITION (C) NO. 412 OF 2012 IN Civil Appeal 9813/2011S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for stay and office report)WITHCONTEMPT PETITION (C) NO. 413 OF 2012 IN Civil Appeal No.9833/2011(With appln(s) for stay and office report)I.A. NOS.68, 69, 70-71, 72-73 & 76-77, 78-79 in Civil Appeal No.9813/2011(With appln(s) for directions and appropriate orders, permission to file &place addl. documents and office report)IA No.1 in Contempt Petition (C) No..... in CA No. 9813/2011(Appln. seeking permission to file contempt petition and office report)CONMT. PET (C) No.260/2013 in C.A. No.8643/2012Date: 13/08/2013 These Petitions were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHARFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman,Adv. Mr. Purushottam Jha, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair, Adv. for M/s. K.J. John & Co.For Respondent(s) Mr. Ram Jethmalani, Sr. Adv. Mr. Rajiv Dhawan,Sr.Adv. Mr. S. Ganesh, Sr. Adv. Mr. K.K. Lehri, Adv. Mr. Satish Kishanchandani,Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Jatin Pore, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. Parag K., Adv. Mr. S. Singh, Adv. Mr. Pranav,Adv. Mr. C.A. Sundaram, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Malhotra, Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Rakesh Dwivedi, Sr. Adv. Ms. S. Pathak, Adv. Mrs. Shally Bhasin Maheshwari,Adv. Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh,Adv. Mr. Irshad Ahmad,Adv.
Mr. Gagan Gupta,Adv. Ms. Sumita Hazarika,Adv. Ms. Manju Jetley,Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List on 26.08.2013 at 2.00 P.M. |(NARENDRA PRASAD) | |(RENUKA SADANA) ||COURT MASTER | |COURT MASTER | 1
fITEM NO.301 COURT NO.8 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSContempt Petition (Civil) No. 412 of 2012 inCivil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for stay and office report)WITHContempt Petition (Civil) No. 413 of 2012 in CA No. 9833/2011(With appln. for stay and office report)IA Nos. 68-69, 70-71, 72-73 and 76-77 in CA No. 9813 of 2011(With appln. for directions, appropriate orders, permission to fileaddl. documents on record and office report)IA No.1 in Contempt Petition (C) No..... in CA No. 9813/2011(Appln. seeking permission to file contempt petition and office report)Contempt Petition (Civil) No. 260 of 2013 in CA No. 8643/2012Date: 06/08/2013 These Petitions were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHARFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Meenakshi Chauhan, Adv. Mr. Purushottam Kr. Jha, Adv. Mr. Varun Singh, Adv. Mr. Anuj Sarma, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair, Adv. Mr. Debarshi Bhuvan, Adv. for M/s. K.J. John & Co.For Respondent(s) Mr. Ram Jethmalani, Sr. Adv. Mr. S. Ganesh, Sr. Adv. Mr. K.K. Lehri, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. ...2/- : 2 : Mr. Satish Kishanchandani, Adv. Mr. Jatin Pore, Adv. Mr. Parag K., Adv. Mr. C.A. Sundaram, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Malhotra, Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Rakesh Dwivedi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Shally Bhasin Maheshwari, Adv. Ms. S. Pathak, Adv. Mr. Sameer Malik, Adv.
Mr. Nagendra Singh, Adv. Mr. Vishwapal Singh, Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Put up on August 13, 2013 at 2.00 p.m. |(N.S.K. Kamesh) | |(Renuka Sadana) ||Court Master | |Court Master |
v REVISEDITEM NO.301 COURT NO.8 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSCONTEMPT PETITION (C) NO. 412 OF 2012 IN Civil Appeal NO.9813/2011S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for stay and office report)WITHCONTEMPT PETITION (C) NO. 413 OF 2012 IN Civil Appeal No.9833/2011(With appln(s) for stay and office report)I.A. NOS.68, 69, 70-71, 72-73 & 76-77 in in Civil Appeal No.9813/2011(With appln(s) for directions and appropriate orders and office report)CONMT. PET (C) No.260/2013 in C.A. No.8643/2012Date: 30/07/2013 These matters were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHARFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P. Datar,Sr.Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal,Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman,Adv. Mr. Dileep P.,Adv. Mr. Varun Singh,Adv. Mr. P.K. Jha,Adv. Mr. Anuj Sarma,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair,Adv. For M/s. K.J. John & Co.For Respondent(s) Mr. Ram Jethmalani,Sr.Adv. Mr. S. Ganesh,Sr.Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan,Adv. Mr. Arshdeep Singh,Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh,Adv. Mr. Jatin Pore,Adv. Mr. Parag Khandhar,Adv. Mr. C.A. Sundaram,Sr.Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Malhotra,Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary,Adv. Mr. Rakesh Dwivedi,Sr.Adv. Mrs. Shally Bhasin Maheshwari,Adv. Mrs. S. Pathak,Adv. Mr. Sameer Malik,Adv. Mr. Sandeep Bajaj,Adv. Mr. Ravi Prakash,Adv. Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh,Adv. Mr. Gagan Gupta,Adv. Ms. Sumita Hazarika,Adv.
Ms. Manju Jetley,Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List on 06.08.2013 at 2.00 P.M. |(NARENDRA PRASAD) | |(RENUKA SADANA) ||COURT MASTER | |COURT MASTER | 1
ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.7 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSCONTEMPT PETITION (C) NO. 412 OF 2012 IN Civil Appeal No. 9813/2011S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for stay and office report)WITHCONTEMPT PETITION (C) NO. 413 OF 2012 IN Civil Appeal No.9833/2011(With appln(s) for stay and office report)I.A. NOS.68, 69, 70-71, 72-73 & 76-77 in in Civil Appeal No.9813/2011(With appln(s) for directions and appropriate orders and office report)CONMT. PET (C) No.260/2013 in C.A. No.8643/2012Date: 24/07/2013 These matters were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHARFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P. Datar,Sr.Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal,Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman,Adv Ms. Meenakshi Chauhan,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair,Adv. For M/s. K.J. John & Co.For Respondent(s) Mr. Ram Jethmalani,Sr.Adv. Mr. K.K. Lehri,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan,Adv. Mr. Arshdeep Singh,Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh,Adv. Mr. Satish Kishanchandani,Adv. Mr. Jatin Pore,Adv. Mr. G. Choudhury,Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan,Adv. Mr. Parag K.,Adv. Mr. Rajiv Dhawan,Sr.Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan,Adv. Mr. Arshdeep Singh,Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh,Adv. Mr. C.A. Sundaram,Sr.Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Malhotra,Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary,Adv. Ms. Rani Prakash,Adv. Mr. Sameer Mallick,Adv. Mr. Mahesh Agarwal,Adv. Mrs. Shally Bhasin Maheshwari,Adv. Mr. Ankur Saigal,Adv.
Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh,Adv. Mr. Gagan Gupta,Adv. Ms. Sumita Hazarika,Adv. Ms. Manju Jetley,Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Issue notice in Contempt Pet.(C) No.260/2013 in C.A. No.8643/2012. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Advocate, appears and accepts notice for both the respondents. List all the matters on 30.07.2013 at 2.00 P.M. Parties to complete their pleadings before that date. |(NARENDRA PRASAD) | |(RENUKA SADANA) ||COURT MASTER | |COURT MASTER | 1
˜ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.9 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSCONTEMPT PETITION (C) NO. 412 OF 2012 IN Civil Appeal No.9813/2011S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for stay and office report)WITHCONTEMPT PETITION (C) NO. 413 OF 2012 IN Civil Appeal No.9833/2011(With appln(s) for stay and office report)I.A. NOS.70-71 & 72 & 73 IN Civil Appeal No.9813/2011(With appln(s) for directions and appropriate orders and office report)Date: 17/07/2013 These matters were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHARFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P. Datar,Sr.Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal,Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman,Adv Mr. Varun Singh,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair,Adv. Mr. Debarshi Bhuyan,Adv. For M/s. K.J. John & Co.For Respondent(s) Mr. Ram Jethmalani,Sr.Adv. Mr. Satish Kishanchandani,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal Mr. Keshav Mohan,Adv. Mr. Jatin Pore,Adv. Mr. G. Choudhury,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan,Adv. Mr. Arshdeep Singh,Adv. Mr. S. Singh,Adv. Mr. Rajiv Dhawan,Sr.Adv. Mr. Uday U. Lalit,Sr. Adv. Mr. Mahesh Agarwal,Adv. Mrs. Shally Bhasin Maheshwari,Adv. Mr. Ankur Saigal,Adv. Mr. C.A. Sundaram,Sr.Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv Mr. Gaurav Malhotra,Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary,Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Registry is directed to get numbered the contempt petition filed against this Court's order dated 5.12.2012 and post the same along with these matters on 24.07.2013 at 2.00 P.M. We call for the Appeals Nos.42/2013 (titled Subrata Roy
Sahara v. SEBI), 48/2013 (titled SHICL v. SEBI), 49/2013 (titled SIRECL v. SEBI) and 50/2013 (titled Ashok Roy Chaudhary & Ors., v. SEBI) pending before the Securities Appellate Tribunal Mumbai and W.P. No.2088 of 2013 (titled Sahara India Lucknow & Anr., v. SEBI) pending before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, which shall stand transferred to this Court. We make it clear that no High Court, Securities Appellate Tribunal and any other Forum shall pass any orders against the orders passed by Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) in implementation of this Court's judgment dated 31.08.2012. |(NARENDRA PRASAD) | |(RENUKA SADANA) ||COURT MASTER | |COURT MASTER | 1
ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.9 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSContempt Petition (Civil) No. 412 of 2012 inCivil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for stay and office report)WITHContempt Petition (Civil) No. 413 of 2012 inCivil Appeal No. 9833 of 2011(With appln. for stay and office report)IA Nos. 68-69, 70-71 and 72-73 in CA No. 9813 of 2011(With appln. for directions, appropriate orders and office report)Date: 08/05/2013 These Petitions were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHARFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Mr. Purushottam Kr. Jha, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair, Adv. Mr. Debarshi Bhuvan, Adv. for M/s. K.J. John & Co.For Respondent(s) Mr. Ram Jethmalani, Sr. Adv. Mr. Satish Kishorchandani, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Jatin Pore, Adv. Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. Mr. Parag, Adv. Mr. Samir Malik, Adv. Mr. Aditya Chopra, Adv. Mr. Mahesh Agarwal, Adv. for Mrs. Shally Bhasin Maheshwari, Adv. ...2/- : 2 : Mr. C.A. Sundaram, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Malhotra, Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R IA Nos. 68-69 of 2013 in CA No. 9813 of 2011 Application praying for filing additional documents is allowed. Heard counsel for either side. Due to paucity of time, it would not be possible for us to
hear the contempt petition and the same stands adjourned to July 17, 2013 at 2.00 p.m. Parties shall complete pleadings in all IAs/petitions before that date. Mr. Arvind Datar, learned senior advocate appearing for the petitioner, submits that the money so far deposited by Saharas' be permitted to be refunded to the genuine investors, with interest, after verifying the genuineness of the documents. SEBI may do so. As far as genuine multiple investors are concerned, the issue be examined on the next date of hearing. Ordered accordingly. |(N.S.K. Kamesh) | |(Renuka Sadana) ||Court Master | |Court Master |
ÆITEM NO.301 COURT NO.9 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSCONTEMPT PETITION (C) NO. 412 OF 2012 IN Civil Appeal 9813/2011S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for stay and office report)WITHContempt Petition (Civil) No. 413 of 2012 inCivil Appeal No. 9833 of 2011(With appln(s) for stay and office report)I.A. Nos.68-69, 70-71 & 72-73 in C.A. No.9813/2011(With appln(s) for directions and appropriate orders and office report)Date: 02/05/2013 These matters were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHARFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P. Datar,Sr.Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal,Av. Ms. Surekha Raman,Adv Mr. Varun Singh,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair,Adv. Mr. Debarshi Bhuyan,Adv. For M/s. K.J. John & Co.For Respondent(s) Mr. Ram Jethmalani,Sr.Adv. Mr. Satish Kishanchandani,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal Mr. Keshav Mohan,Adv. Mr. Jatin Pore,Adv. Mr. G. Choudhury,Adv. (In Cont. Pet. No.412/2012) Mr. Vikas Singh,Sr.Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan,Adv. Mr. Arshdeep Singh,Adv. Mr. S. Singh,Adv. (In Cont. Pet. No.413/2012) Mr. Rajiv Dhawan,Sr.Adv. Mr. P.S. Patwalia,Sr.Adv. Mr. S. Ganesh,Sr.Adv. Mr. Mahesh Agarwal,Adv. Mrs. Shally Bhasin Maheshwari,Adv. Mr. Ankur Saigal,Adv. Mr. C.A. Sundaram,Sr.Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi,Adv Mr. Gaurav Malhotra,Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary,Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R
List on May 08, 2013, immediately after the normal work in the Court comprising Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jagdish Singh Khehar is over. IA Nos. 72-73 of 2013 in Civil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011 Issue notice. Counsel appearing for the respective petitioners (non- applicants) accept notice. List on May 08, 2013, immediately after the normal work in the Court comprising Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jagdish Singh Khehar is over. Counter affidavit, if any, be filed before the next date. We are inclined to stay all further proceedings in Appeal Nos. 42/2013 (Subrata Roy Sahara v. SEBI), 48/2013 (SHICL v. SEBI), 49/2013 (SIRECL v. SEBI) and 50/2013 (Ashok Roy Chaudhary & Ors. v. SEBI) pending before the Securities Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai, and in Writ Petition No. 2088/2013 pending before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench, since we are examining the question, whether the respondents have complied with the various conditions stipulated in our judgment dated 31st August, 2012. Ordered accordingly. |(NARENDRA PRASAD) | |(N.S.K. KAMESH) ||COURT MASTER | |COURT MASTER |
\232ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.9 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSContempt Petition (Civil) No. 412 of 2012 inCivil Appeal No. 9813 of 2011S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for stay and office report)WITHContempt Petition (Civil) No. 413 of 2012 inCivil Appeal No. 9833 of 2011Date: 22/04/2013 These Petitions were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHARFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pratap Venugopal, Adv. Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv. Mr. Varun Singh, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Nair, Adv. Mr. Debarshi Bhuvan, Adv. for M/s. K.J. John & Co.For Respondent(s)R-1 Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv.R-2 to 4 Mr. Uday U. Lalit, Sr. Adv. Mr. Mahesh Agarwal, Adv. for Mrs. Shally Bhasin Maheshwari, Adv.R-5 Mr. C.A. Sundaram, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gautam Awasthi, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Malhotra, Adv. Mr. Ayush Choudhary, Adv. ...2/- : 2 : UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R As prayed for by Mr. C.A. Sundaram, senior advocate appearing for respondent No.5, one week's time is granted for filing reply to the contempt petitions. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1, submitted that he wants some time to file a reply to the additional affidavit filed by SEBI on April 11, 2013. Mr. Arvind Datar, learned senior counsel appearing for the SEBI, submitted that, except a letter dated February 23, 2013 from the Punjab National Bank addressed to SEBI, no new documents have been filed along with the additional affidavit and they only contain the affidavit filed by the respondents themselves on January 14,
2012 and an advertisement dated March 18, 2013 published by them. In such circumstances, we find no reason to accede to the prayer for a longer adjournment. One week's time is granted to the respondents for filing their reply to the additional affidavit filed by SEBI. Put up on May 02, 2013 at 3.00 p.m. IA Nos. 68-69 of 2013 in CA No. 9813 of 2011 Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Mr. U.U. Lalit and Mr. C.A. Sundaram, learned counsel appearing for the respective petitioners, state that they would file their response within one week. Reply affidavit, if any, be filed on or before April 29, 2013. Put up on May 02, 2013 at 3.00 p.m. |(N.S.K. Kamesh) | |(Renuka Sadana) ||Court Master | |Court Master |
äITEM NO.MM-3 COURT NO.10 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSCONTEMPT PETITION (C) NO. 412 OF 2012 IN Civil Appeal 9813/2011S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(With office report)WithContempt Petition (C) No. 413 of 2012 in Civil Appeal 9833/2011Date: 04/04/2013 These Petitions were mentioned today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRAFor Petitioner(s) M/S. K.J. John & Co.For Respondent(s) Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal, Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan, Adv. UPON being mentioned by counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List on 22.04.2013 before the appropriate Bench at 3.30.P.M. |(Jayant Kumar Arora) | |(Renuka Sadana) ||Sr. P.A. | |Court Master |
hITEM NO.301 & 302 COURT NO.10 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSCONTEMPT PETITION (C) NO. 412 OF 2012 IN Civil Appeal No.9813/2011(FOR PREL. HEARING)S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)(With office report)WITHCONTEMPT PETITION (C) NO. 413 OF 2012 IN Civil Appeal No.9833/2011(FOR PREL. HEARING)Date: 06/02/2013 These Petitions were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHARFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Pratap Venugopal,Adv. Mr. Surekha Raman,Adv. Mr. Purushottam Kumar Jha,Adv. Mr. Varun Singh,Adv. For M/s. K.J. John & Co.,A.O.R.For Respondent(s) Mr. Ram Jethmalani,Sr.Adv. Mr. Satish Kishanchandani,Adv. Mr. Gaurav Kejriwal,Adv. Mr. Keshav Mohan,Adv. Mr. Jatin Pore,Adv. Mr. Manu Sharma,Adv. Ms. Maneesha Dhir,Adv. Mr. Apoorve K.,Adv. Mr. Chirag Kher,Adv. Mr. Gagan Gupta,Adv. (For Ministry of Corporate Affairs) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Issue notice returnable within four weeks. Personal appearance is dispensed with for the time being. Petitioner is directed to file status report within two weeks. Additional affidavit, if any, may be filed within two weeks. Let both the matters be listed together. |(NARENDRA PRASAD) | |(S.S.R. KRISHNA) ||COURT MASTER | |COURT MASTER | 1
ÆITEM NO.MM2 COURT NO.11 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSCONTEMPT PETITION (C) NO. 412 OF 2012 IN Civil Appeal 9813/2011S.E.B.I. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSAHARA INDIA REAL ESTATE CORPN.LTD.&ORS. Respondent(s)WITH CONTEMPT PETITION (C) NO.413/2012 IN Civil Appeal 9833/2011Date: 19/11/2012 These matters were mentioned today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRAFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Pratap Venugopal,Adv. For M/S. K.J. John & Co.,A.O.R.For Respondent(s) UPON being mentioned the Court made the following O R D E R List in December, 2012. |(NARENDRA PRASAD) | |(RENUKA SADANA) ||COURT MASTER | |COURT MASTER | 1