Skip to Content

Thursday, October 1st, 2020

Former Ranbaxy promoters get 6 weeks to file asset details

Closed
by August 25, 2016 General
Written by Aneesha Mathur | New Delhi | Published:August 25, 2016 3:20 am

The Delhi High Court has granted six weeks time to the former promoters/directors of Indian pharmaceutical company Ranbaxy to file detailed affidavits with list of assets to the court, in response to a plea filed by Daiichi Sankyo Ltd for execution of an arbitration award passed by a Singapore-based court of arbitration.

The court has also directed Daiichi to respond to “objections” raised by the former promoters/directors of Ranbaxy against the arbitral award. The former promoters had raised objections under Section 48 of the Arbitration Act claiming that there were “substantive faults” in the award passed by the Singapore court, and the award cannot therefore be enforced in India. Daiichi has also been directed to file its response within six weeks.

The Indian Express had reported on Tuesday that the Delhi High Court bench of Justice Manmohan Singh had directed the respondents, which include former promoters Malvinder Singh and Shivinder Singh, as well as RHC Group directors and companies, to file the details of their assets. A communication from RHC Holdings Corporate Communication vice president Krishnan Ramalingam to The Indian Express had claimed that the report was “inaccurate and contrary to the proceedings that had actually occurred in the court”.

The email had said, “Whereas the news item claims that “Directors & Promoters of Indian pharmaceutical company Ranbaxy were granted six weeks Monday to file detailed affidavits with complete lists of their assets before the Delhi High Court,” the truth is it was Daiichi Sankyo, the petitioner in this case, which had sought six weeks’ time from the court to be able to reply to the “Substantive Objections” that had been raised by the lawyers of Mr Malvinder Singh, Mr Shivinder Singh and others, who are respondents in this case brought by Daiichi Sanyo.”

However, the August 22 order of the court, which was released on Wednesday, notes that the “learned counsel appearing for the contesting respondents submit that their clients have partly complied with the order dated 25 July 2016. They seek some more time to file all the details as directed in the last order along with affidavit(s) on behalf of all the contesting respondents. Let the same be done in six weeks. The petitioner is also granted six weeks time to file the response to the objections filed by the contesting respondents who are granted liberty to file the rejoinder to the response within four weeks thereafter”.

The orders passed by the court on July 25, which are available on the court website, had noted that “Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondents No.1 to 4 and 13 have alienated and encumbered the assets of the respondents to third parties. Let the said respondents give full details of the same in their reply which may be filed within three weeks. Rejoinder, if any, be filed within one week. The said respondents are also directed to file their affidavit(s) disclosing the details of immovable assets owned by them.” The order sheet of the High Court on Monday also takes note of an affidavit filed by Daiichi stating that the respondents (Ranbaxy promoters) had “parted with the possession of one of the properties”. The counsel for the Ranbaxy promoters had, however, assured the court that assets were not being sold to third parties.

Previous
Next