Constitution of India - Where more than one interpretation can be given to Court's order, then benefit has to be given to party against whom contempt is alleged: HC (See 'Legal Desk') SEBI Act - Merely attending board meetings cannot lead to conclusion that appellant is involved in day to day affairs of Company: SAT (See 'Legal Desk') Competition Act - Grievances of Informants like payment of maintenance and electricity charges is in nature of contractual issue and disputes not having any Competition concern: CCI (See 'Legal Desk') India attends G20 Working Group Meeting at Brasilia (See 'Corp Brief') SEBI ICDR Regulations, 2018 - By not locking entire pre-preferential allotment shareholding of two allottees Noticee violated SEBI ICDR Regulations : SEBI (See 'Legal Desk') Arbitration Act - Serving officer of respondent shall act as arbitrator is invalid stipulation which makes it incumbent on Court to appoint independent sole arbitrator to adjudicate disputes : HC (See 'Legal Desk') SEBI Act - Appellant is misleading its investors that it is registered with SEBI as investment advisor and played fraud in violation of IA Regulations : SAT (See 'Legal Desk') CCI okays subscription to CCPS B of API Holdings by MEMG LLP and 360 ONE (See 'Corp Brief') PMLA - Court will not cancel interim bail granted to respondent as interim bail is about to expire within short period of time : HC (See 'Legal Desk') CCI approves 100% acquisition of Lanco Amarkantak Power by Adani (See 'Corp Brief') CGST Act - Case does not fall under ambit of Anti-Profiteering provisions of CGST Act : CCI (See 'Legal Desk') BRO connects strategic Nimmu-Padam-Darcha road in Ladakh (See 'Corp Brief') Arbitration Act - Any party having failed to make substantive claim in arbitral proceedings, cannot seek recovery by way of interim mandatory injunction u/s 17 : HC (See 'Legal Desk') SEBI Act - Trading pattern of appellants with other noticees indicate that there is meeting of mind between appellants and other noticees : SAT (See 'Legal Desk') SARFAESI Act - Respondent shall not take any coercive steps against Petitioner prior to 15th March, 2024 provided Petitioners file appeal before DRAT on or before March 01, 2024 : HC (See 'Legal Desk') Guj Govt sets up Telecom Facilitation Centre to support stakeholders (See 'Corp Brief') SEBI Act - SEBI shall not initiate any enforcement action against Applicant for SAST violations provided representation made in settlement proceedings are subsequently not found untrue : SEBI (See 'Legal Desk') India, Bhutan ink MoUs on clean energy, agriculture & tourism (See 'Corp Brief') PMLA - Surgery of knee cannot be categorized as 'life-threatening situation' and surgery which is to be undergone by applicant is not of such nature which necessitates applicant's release on interim bail only : HC (See 'Legal Desk') NCC, NPCIL ink MoU to raise awareness on peaceful use of nuclear power (See 'Corp Brief') SEBI - Any violation committed by Company which is fraudulent in nature has to be attributed to individual acting as Director at relevant point of time : SAT (See 'Legal Desk') Golden Jubilee Celebration of KVKs held in Puducherry (See 'Corp Brief') PMLA - Court declined to grant bail to Satyendar Jain in money laundering case and also cancelled interim bail granted as there are sufficient material collected by ED to show that he is prima facie guilty of alleged offences : SC (See 'Legal Desk') 42nd IPHE Steering Committee to be hosted by EU (See 'Corp Brief') IBC - Application filed u/s 7 of code can be admitted as debt and default has been established : NCLT (See 'Legal Desk')

Former Ranbaxy promoters argue Singapore Tribunal award unenforceable in India

Published: Aug 24, 2016

By TIOLCORP News Service

NEW DELHI, AUG 24, 2016: THE bitter dispute between former promoters of Ranbaxy and Japanese drug major Daiichi has taken a complicated legal turn. The former   Ranbaxy promoters   Malvinder Singh   and   Shivinder Singh , facing a Rs 2,562-crore penalty, told Delhi High Court that the   Singapore tribunal 's arbitration award to   Daiichi Sankyo   can't be enforced under Indian law.   The Singh brothers were accused of concealing information regarding wrongdoing at Ranbaxy when they sold a majority stake in it to the Japanese firm in 2008.   Daiichi Sankyo eventually had to reach a $500-million settlement with the US Department of Justice in 2013 over allegations that Ranbaxy had falsified data. "Substantive objections" exist under India's arbitration law to make the order unenforceable,   Harish Salve , counsel for the brothers and others named in Daiichi Sankyo's enforcement petition, told the high court on Monday.  

If the Singhs' contention on enforceability is accepted by the Delhi High Court, the award can't be implemented through the sale of assets in India. Along with interest and legal fees, the total liability is pegged at Rs 3,500 crore. The Singh brothers have appealed against the order in Singapore as well.  

The tribunal wasn't entitled to award consequential damages, besides which Daiichi Sankyo withheld certain documents that would prove it was aware of the inquiries before agreeing to the acquisition, said the Singhs' counsel.  

Justice   Manmohan Singh , who was hearing the arguments, asked Daiichi Sankyo's counsel to respond to the objections at the next hearing, which has been scheduled for November 28. Counsel for the Singh brothers cited provisions under section 48 in the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, that lays down conditions under which arbitration orders can be rejected

Details of Malvinder Singh's assets were submitted to the court in a sealed cover on Monday. The other respondents have been asked to file similar affidavits. The court, which is also hearing a related case regarding freezing of assets, accepted an assurance by the Singh bothers that no changes would be made to ownership, pending a decision.

TIOL CORP SEARCH

TIOL GROUP WEBSITES