Dutch beer major Heineken, which holds 42 per cent stake in United Breweries Ltd (UBL), on Friday filed an application before the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) to implead in the case between SBI-led consortium and Kingfisher Airlines Ltd.
A counsel, appearing for Heineken before the DRT’s Presiding Officer CR Benakanahalli, submitted an application saying that the SBI-led consortium has sought attachment of UBL shares.
StanChart’s clarification“Heineken has some presumptive rights on UBL shares held/owned by Vijay Mallya. We are seeking rights on purchase of shares if it is attached and sold as per court order,” the counsel said.
Meanwhile, a Senior Counsel for the Standard Chartered Bank (SCB) clarified to the Tribunal on Friday that they have “not cast aspersions on the SBI-led consortium” during Wednesday’s hearing but the proceeding as reported in the media was “not in a proper context in totality of what was argued…”
On the other hand, the counsel for United Spirits Ltd (USL) pleaded for vacating the interim order passed by the tribunal attaching the USL shares, while pointing out that the USAL was neither a guarantor nor borrower, and the consortium of banks had not made USL a party in their original application.
“USL is not part of UB Group. Three per cent share is held by UB Group companies, Vijay Mallya and his family. So there is no nexus with the group. USL has met contractual obligation, that is, paid all the money borrowed from the banks (PNB and IDBI),” the counsel said. PNB upon receipt of ₹628 crore due to them issued loan closure certificate and also duly released the shares held as guarantees and gave a clean chit.
While IDBI, despite recovery of dues (around ₹500 crore) substantiated recovery of a further ₹40 crore and has also claimed dividends from 2013, the counsel argued.
Further, the counsel for USL contended that IDBI is in fragment violation of the RBI norms by withholding securities, despite repayment of loan amount.
“IDBI has no right to sit on judgment over loan transaction repayment is valid. This is a clear case of extraction of more money from USL just because it is controlled by a foreign company,” the USL counsel claimed.