Appeals over Vijay Mallya’s bankruptcy described by judge as ‘Alice in Wonderland’ case | India News

The TOI correspondent from London:Vijay Mallya’s attraction towards a bankruptcy order made in the UK courts concluded on Thursday with the judge overseeing the listening to of three separate appeals referring a number of instances to the “Alice in Wonderland world of the case” and “going down rabbit holes”. Judge Sir Anthony Mann has reserved judgment.
The Indian businessman repeated his arguments that the belongings realised by the banks exceeded what he owed them so he ought to by no means have been made bankrupt.
All the whereas Mallya is said bankrupt, a trustee in bankruptcy can examine his belongings, together with these in offshore trusts.
The courtroom heard that there are “potentially valuable assets and trusts” that the bankruptcy trustee can “challenge”, citing the VDMS Trust, and Sileta Trust, which owns Mallya’s London townhouse Cornwall Terrace. “Dr Mallya has disavowed any interest in this trust and in his car collection. He says he is not a beneficiary but a trustee in bankruptcy would want to investigate this. When people say why are we doing bankruptcy, there is clearly a purpose to it,” Tony Beswetherick KC, instructed by TLT LLP, representing the banks, defined. Mallya final week filed an utility to annul the bankruptcy order
Mallya was made bankrupt by the UK excessive courtroom following an amended bankruptcy petition introduced by a State Bank of India-led consortium of banks to whom he owes £1.05 billion (as of June 2020). They registered the 2017 Bengaluru DRT judgment of Rs 6,203 crores towards him in the UK excessive courtroom in Nov 2017. The judgment pertains to Kingfisher Airlines failing to fulfill debt repayments and Mallya having offered a private assure.
Mark Watson-Gandy, representing Mallya, mentioned Mallya had paid again Rs 8,645 crores on the time the bankruptcy order was made — in phrases of belongings realised by the banks by means of sale — so the bankruptcy petition must have been dismissed as this exceeded the debt he owed in the DRT, and the 11.5% rate of interest was the topic of an ongoing problem in the Karnataka HC, which retired SC judge Justice Verma had mentioned had a superb prospect of success.
However Beswetherick mentioned the banks’ recoveries had been all “contingent” as the banks had given an enterprise to the courts in India they might restore Mallya’s belongings to the central govt ought to Mallya be convicted in India of a cash laundering offence, had been he to return and face prison trial. He at present has indefinite depart to stay in the UK.
Mallya was additionally interesting towards the amended bankruptcy petition that the banks filed in which mentioned they might surrender their rights of safety over “Indian property of the debtor” in the occasion a bankruptcy order is made. Mallya argued the banks couldn’t surrender their safety as they had been prevented from doing so by Indian regulation and there was a public curiosity in them protecting it as it was public cash. But Beswetherick mentioned “Indian law was irrelevant” as the case was about English insolvency legal guidelines. The third attraction was by the banks, who had been interesting towards earlier being accused of getting safety over a few of Mallya’s belongings, and understanding they did and never declaring it on the unique bankruptcy petition, which led to them being compelled to amend it.
Beswetherick mentioned: “The banks say they do not have any security over any of Mallya’s assets in India or UK.” Watson-Gandy retorted the banks had claimed to be secured collectors throughout numerous proceedings in India.
Mann commented: “In this Alice in Wonderland world of this case Mallya says the banks held security and the banks deny that they did.”