- (1.) I.As. No. 37-39: 1. Taken on Board. By our order dated 22.07.2014 we had allowed I.As. No. 10 - 12 of 2014 filed by the contemnors and permitted Saharas to transfer, sell or encumber three offshore hotel properties owned by them subject to the condition that the entire sale consideration received by the Saharas after repayment of the loan outstanding towards the Bank of China is deposited with SEBI in compliance with the directions contained in the conditional bail order of this Court dated 26.03.2014. We had further directed that the excess amount, if any, shall be deposited by the Saharas in a separate account to await orders from this Court regarding their utilisation and that the sale of offshore properties shall not be at a price lesser than the value estimated by CBRE and JLL for the said properties reduced at the most by 5% of such value.
(2.) Pursuant to the above order Saharas had started negotiations with the parties willing to purchase the said offshore properties. In the course of the said negotiations a certain "In Principle Agreement" was also it appears drawn up but before the deal could be finalised difficulties appear to have arisen on account of adverse publicity and demonstration by a section of the public against the proposed sale of the properties to a particular entity. To cut the long story short the proposed sale of the property in terms of the in Principle Agreement has in due course fallen through leaving no option for the Saharas except to explore alternative methods of sale/transfer or mortgage of the said properties to raise the requisite amount. It is in that backdrop that Saharas have filed I.As. No. 37-39 in which among others they have sought from this Court the following two reliefs: a) Grant its permission, whether by Oasis or by some other arty, of Bank of China's loans to Sahara (including the related securities) and the amendment of the terms and conditions applicable to such loans. b) grant its permission for raising of additional junior loans of up to US $ 650 million and the creation of subordinate charges on the said 3 foreign hotel properties (or on Sahara's shareholding in the relevant hotel owning companies)
(3.) When these I.As. came up for hearing before us on 02.12.2014 we were informed by M/s. Rajeev Dhawan and S. Ganesh senior advocates that in terms of the fresh proposal mooted by Sharas the Bank of China's outstanding loan shall be repaid by substituting another lender in its place with the permission of this Court. Besides Sharas propose to raise an additional junior loan for a sum of Us 640 millions against the offshore properties mentioned above. M/s. Arvind Datar, appearing for SEBI and Shekhar Naphade as an Amicus Curiae had sought some time to examine the proposed transactions and the documents relating thereto. They had also asked for certain further information in regard to certain aspects before they make their submissions. We are told by Mr. Ganesh that queries raised by the learned Counsel opposite have since been answered and explained in writing and that what remains is only an apprehension expressed by M/s. Naphade and Datar regarding the permissibility of bringing into India the money that may be raised towards proposed junior loan against the said properties. Mr. Naphade holds the view that no amount borrowed from outside the country can be brought into India with a view to repaying any outstanding liability. He urged that apart from statutory and other complications in the matter. Sahara may have to seek the permission of the competent authority in the Reserve Bank of India under the provisions of FEMA and the regulations framed thereunder.;