Mathew Varghese V/S The South Indian Bank Ltd.

A.IR:327/2007

Record of proceedings on 1.11.2012 in  IA No.1527/07 (delay);  No representation for the petitioner .  Petitioner is called absent.

Ld. Counsel Shri Arun Prasad appearing on behalf of Ld. Counsel Shri Girish Kumar for the respondent bank took this tribunal through the averments made by the petitioner in the affidavit and stated that the petitioner has not filed the medical certificate and that from the non filing of the medical certificate it can be inferred that the reason stated in the affidavit cannot be believed.  Ld. Counsel further stated that the reason stated by the petitioner  has not been substantiated by the petitioner and that this tribunal cannot venture to condone the delay when the petitioner himself has chosen not to file the medical certificate. 

 Ld. Counsel further stated that no sufficient cause has been shown by the petitioner for not filing this appeal within the prescribed time and that thereafter the delay has also not been explained.  Ld. Counsel further stated that this petition deserves only a dismissal as the petitioner has filed this petition only to drag on the proceedings and further to delay the recovery of public money and that this tribunal also should take a serious note of the public money involved in this case and prayed that this IA should be dismissed.

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the respondent bank.

It is seen that the petitioner has chosen not to be present in this tribunal to put forth his case.  A perusal of the affidavit filed along with this petition sans the medical certificate drives this tribunal to  come to the conclusion that the illness of the petitioner has not been proved and that therefore the delay has not been properly explained. 

 It is also seen that the petitioner has not repaid public money borrowed by him. 

Therefore for the reason that the delay has not been properly explained and  for the reason that public money has to be recovered this IA is dismissed.

The above Order was passed by the Hon''ble Chair Person of DRAT ,Chennai on 1 st  Nov 2012

Vijay Mallya's last stand : Selling his crown jewel United Spirits

Asha Rai & Boby Kurian, TNN | Nov 10, 2012, 04.41AM IST

BANGALORE/MUMBAI: "I feel sorry for him" or "he has my sympathies" are not the phrases you would ordinarily associate with as flamboyant a person as Vijay Mallya. But, indeed, they cropped up often when talking to a large number of people who have known him personally and professionally for this story.

Sympathy that less than two weeks after publicly, almost defiantly, proclaiming that he would not sell family silver to fund his grounded airline Kingfisher, he had to do precisely that. A sense of sorrow for a man who has been felled by hubris. Or, as an associate memorably put it, through "nasha."

Mallya was always a high-stakes business operator. He built the liquor and beer businesses he inherited from his father, the late Vittal Mallya, at the young age of 28 in 1983, not only into dominant market players in India but in the case of the former into the world's largest drinks company by volume. Much of the growth was fuelled by debt. His heavily leveraged balance sheets would have felled a lesser mortal but Mallya sailed through with minor hiccups though 'Is Mallya broke?' has been a constant refrain among the chatterati and corporate chieftains for two decades now. Alas, a similar tactic did not work in the airline that he launched with much fanfare on his son Sidhartha's 18th birthday in May 2005.

Standing personal guarantee to the debt raised by the airline and pledging much of his stake in other businesses to keep the airline afloat have today pushed him to sell the crown jewel in his portfolio: the liquor company, United Spirits, which has 50% of the Indian market and was the source of Mallya's clout: economic and political, and his flamboyant lifestyle.

"Vijay has an emotional and rational side to him. But somewhere in recent times he lost the sense of proportion allowing the Kingfisher crisis to spiral out of hand. He's extremely passionate about the businesses he built, not that he loved the inherited ones less. That's what made him stick out for a company (KFA) which was beyond any reasonable sense of business," says Ravi Jain, a joint venture partner and former managing director of Mallya's brewing unit, who used to drive Mallya and his ex-wife Sameera around Kolkata in his old fiat car.

Ramesh Vangal, who was outbid by Mallya for Shaw Wallace, believes, "This is the end of an era. He built an enormous business with great potential. Allowing it to fall into the hands of an MNC is a little of a regret. But it's the practical thing to do." Vangal, the former Pepsi senior executive who has interests in the Indian liquor industry, points out, "It's Karma actually. Vijay has seen the best of times. Now he's facing the most challenging. It's part of the circle of which we are all in. We learn as we go around."



Nobody doubts Mallya's intelligence or his ability to build a business or a brand. Especially the latter. Even the ill-starred KFA is a testimony to his brand-building prowess. "He had this terrific grasp of any situation and could talk straight however difficult it was," UB Bhat, a senior executive who worked with him in the 1980s, reminisces how the young Mallya flew into Bangalore from the United States 48 hours after his father's sudden demise. "He was hardly 28 then, and there were whispers that his father's close aides H P Bhagat or Srinivasa Rao could be considered for the role of chairman. He recovered swiftly to take charge of the affairs and went to create a strong corporate identity for the diversified businesses ( Herbertsons, Phipson, Kissan Foods, etc) his father had built. In the process, he brought several chieftains under his direct control just like what Ratan Tata managed within Tata Group," says Bhat, who was involved in organizing Mallya's first marriage to Sameera (formerly Sakina), sometimes doubling up as a priest, at a temple in Goa.

Jain argues, "He would have done this (Diageo) deal in the ordinary course, but now it's unfortunately seen as him being forced to sell the family business. The liquor market is changing and his own operations have become too big for him to manage alone. One can philosophically argue this is the beginning of retirement, and why not? He was at the top of his energy for thirty years."

Mallya's often described by those close to him as proverbially a man with nine lives. He's been in umpteen scrapes before and come out of it. While the general consensus is that his luck finally ran out, there are others who think by doing this deal with Diageo he's actually doing a smart thing, getting the 10th life perhaps.

K P Balasubramaniam, former chairman of Mysore Breweries (now SAB-Miller India) and an old Mallya friend from Bangalore believes, "It's a smart thing he's done. Diageo is a well run, profitable company. His 15% stake will appreciate in value and he will get good dividends. Same is the case with the beer business (where Heineken is the equal owner)."

A sentiment echoed by Kishore Chhabria with whom he settled long-standing disputes recently. Said he, "The good thing about him is that he continues to be lucky. He would have been gone without this deal, but he has pulled it off. A lot of people might say bechara mar gaya but watch out. His 15% stake will be worth far more in three years than 29% he had. This was a pragmatic deal to do. Good for him and good for the industry." Chhabria, the chairman of Allied Blenders & Distillers, the largest Indian-owned spirits company now, added, "I am sure he will enjoy playing the investor role from now on. People move on like the Singh brothers of Ranbaxy. There's no need to be emotional."

And emotional Mallya has never been about business. He's bought and sold businesses whenever he's seen value. He sold Kissan to Hindustan Lever, after dallying with Nestle a bit. Berger Paintswas sold for a huge profit. He offloaded the brilliant portfolio he inherited from his dad - large stakes in Cabdury and Hoechst - saying there were not core to his business.

Nobody also disputes Mallya's generosity, large heartedness to his family and friends. Says a Bangalore corporate chieftain, "He's a very nice guy. Very generous. Never malicious. Unfortunately, a lot of people misuse that. There are lots of people who take advantage of his hospitality, fly in his planes, attend his parties and then snigger behind his back."

His flamboyant lifestyle - close associates say his personal life was never as colourful as made out by the media - the yachts, the planes, the cars, the horses, the girls, the islands, FI and IPL teams, multiple homes - in the end damned him in the public eye.

But all agree that the very expensive lifestyle - an apocryphal story has it that a big, global PE which did a due diligence when it was looking to invest in Kingfisher put the cost of the lifestyle at $60 million annually - would have to be piped down. Perhaps Mallya was readying for such a life with his recent tweets which suggested happiness at his loss of billionaire status.

Sri.G.Raja Rao V/S Corporation Bank

A.IR:943/2010

Record of proceedings on 6.11.2012 in IA No.1904/2010(delay): No representation for the petitioner. Petitioner is called absent.  Ld. Counsel Shri A. Periasamy appearing on behalf of the respondent bank stated that this Tribunal should dismiss this appeal as per the orders of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras dt 28.8.2012 passed in WP Nos. 13456/2012, 8381/2012 and 12970/2012 as condonation of delay does not arise in  cases of  appeals filed under Sec.18 of the SARFAESI Act..

  Hence this IA is dismissed in obedience to the orders of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras passed in WP Nos.13456/2012, 8381/2012 and 12970/2012.

The above Order was passed by the Hon''ble Chair Person of DRAT ,Chennai on 6th Nov 2012

M/s.S.L.T.Farms (P) ltd & anr V/S IOB

A.IR:236/2010

Record of proceedings on 7.11.2012 in IA No.586/2010 (delay):  No representation for the petitioners.  Petitioners are called absent.    

Ld. Counsel Shri Benjamin George appearing on behalf of the respondent bank drew the attention of this Tribunal to the order of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras passed in WP Nos. 13456/2012, 8381/2012 and 12970/2012  and stated that in obedience to the above said order this Tribunal should dismiss this IA as condonation of delay does not arise in  cases of  appeals filed under Sec.18 of the SARFAESI Act.

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the respondent bank.

This IA is dismissed in obedience to the orders of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras passed in WP Nos. 13456/2012, 8381/2012 and 12970/2012.

The above Order was passed by the Hon''ble Chair Person of DRAT ,Chennai on 7 th Nov 2012

Vijaya Bank V/S Mr.M.Nagaraj

R.A(S.A):122/2010

Record of proceedings on 7.11.2012 in IA No.1143/2011 (set aside petition);  Norepresentation for the petitioner.  Petitioner is called absent.

Ld. Counsel Shri Om Prakash appearing on behalf of the respondent bank drew the attention of this tribunal to the fact that orders have already been passed in this matter and stated that the question of setting aside of  the order of this tribunal by this very same tribunal does not arise at all more particularly when the petitioner has chosen not to be present and pursue his case.  

Ld. Counsel further stated that the appeal was allowed on 15.9.2011 and that this tribunal should not keep this IA pending and should dismiss the same as the petitioner has chosen not to be present and urge his case for setting aside the order passed by this tribunal more particularly when the petition has been adjourned on 9.8.2012 to today at the behest of the petitioner.  

 Ld. Counsel emphasized the fact that this tribunal cannot set aside the final order and that it is for the petitioner to work out his remedy before a higher forum and submitted that the petition itself is not maintainable and that the same may be dismissed as not maintainable.

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the respondent bank.

This petition is dismissed as the same is not maintainable.

The above Order was passed by the Hon''ble Chair Person of DRAT ,Chennai on7th Nov 2012

SBI: Mid-corporate, SME loans still stressed

MVS Santoshkumar, BL Research Bureau Nov 10,2012

The net profit growth of State Bank of India was driven by one-off items even as asset quality stress continues unabated.

Muted net interest income growth due to fall in margins also took a toll on the profitability. SBI wrote provisions worth Rs 260 crore back, which it had set aside for investment depreciation.

This coupled with Rs 230 crore profits on sale of investments led to a net profit growth of 30 per cent.

The domestic net interest margin declined from 3.86 per cent in the June quarter to 3.68 per cent on the back of lending rate cuts and lower credit-deposit ratio.

Rising deposit costs, reversal of interest income accrued on stressed loans and booking of net present value loss on restructured loans also led to fall in margins.

The slippage of assets into non-performing category in the case of SBI was lower than most public sector banks.

SBI’s gross NPAs rose by 16 basis points sequentially as compared to 50 basis points jump in the case of many other public sector banks.

But the NPA rise would have been higher had SBI not written off Rs 2,000 crore worth of NPAs.

Asset quality continues to deteriorate in three segments — SME, mid-corporate and agriculture loans.

The SME and mid-corporate group showed severe stress with fresh slippages from these two segments accounting for 77 per cent of fresh slippages in the September quarter.

While the loan growth to these segments declined, rising slippages continues to be a concern.

Incidentally, including the restructured loans, the net stressed assets of the mid-corporate group was close to 20 per cent as compared to around 6 per cent for the whole bank.

In agriculture loans, the bank is increasing collateral based lending to cap asset quality pressures.

Kingfisher revival: Bankers optimistic after USL-Diageo deal

BL :MUMBAI, NOV.9:2012

Most of the lenders have already classified the airline as an NPA.

 

With Diageo set to acquire majority stake in United Spirits Ltd (USL) from the United Breweries (UB) Group, bankers feel there is a ray of hope that the beleaguered Kingfisher Airlines (KFA) will fly again.

Bankers feel that UB Group promoter, Vijay Mallya, will channel the funds raised, estimated at around $2 billion, from the stake sale to revive KFA.

KFA’s licence has been suspended by aviation regulator.

State Bank of India Chairman said “for the airline, nothing can get any worse from here”.

Commenting on the USL-Diageo deal, Chaudhuri said, “If at all it (KFA) starts flying and gets capitalised, there can only be an upside and to that extent this news is positive.”

SBI has classified the KFA account as a non-performing asset and the entire loan has been provided for. There is no downside in Kingfisher, said the SBI chief.

“We have always maintained that Kingfisher needs capital. Where the capital comes from, we are absolutely agnostic to it. It can come from his (Mallya’s) group company, his personal capital, foreign money or foreign airlines… it is better for the airline,” he said.

Corporation Bank Chairman Ajay Kumar also maintains Kingfisher as “nothing (regarding revival of KFA) is on the table as of now.” At present, Corporation Bank’s exposure to the financially troubled airline stands at Rs 160 crore and classified as a non-performing asset.

A consortium of 17 banks amounts has an exposure of about Rs 7,000 crore. SBI, the leader of the consortium, has an exposure of Rs 1,458 crore. Most of the lenders to the grounded airline have already classified KFA as NPA.