75.18 F
New York, US
June 16, 2026

PreetNama
English News

New UK ruling on PNB may influence Mallya debt recovery case

789

A judgement of the high court of England and Wales in favour of the Punjab National Bank’s international branch in a $22 million recovery case may set a precedent in the ongoing debt recovery bid in the UK by a consortium of Indian banks against businessman Vijay Mallya.

The PNB case involves two loans between 2012 and 2013 to defendants that include India-based businessman Pradeep Agrawal of Superior Drinks Pvt Ltd. and their non-payment of loans to purchase and operate a cruise liner, MV Delphin.

The PNB’s subsidiary in London operates under English law. The defendants accepted they entered into various guarantees but challenged the jurisdiction of the English court to hear the bank’s claim and also raised technicalities about notices served in India.

After a recent two-day hearing, conducted remotely due to the coronavirus pandemic, Justice Sara Cockerill rejected all of the defendants’ arguments and ordered them to make an interim payment towards the bank’s costs of £70,000The judgment is likely to be a useful precedent for other enforcement cases brought by Indian banks in the UK against promoters or guarantors, particularly the judge’s dismissal of the argument that the guarantees were invalid because of a lack of regulatory approval by the Reserve Bank of India.

On the point of whether a certificate of good service from a foreign (in this case Indian) judicial authority can be valid service of English judicial proceedings, Cockerill also found that there is a strong presumption of service and that a claimant need not look beyond the certificate.

Paul Gair of law firm TLT that represented PNB, said: “This is a significant victory for PNBIL as it means it can now pursue its enforcement action against the defendants in the English courts. It is also a landmark decision for similar cases, as the defendants’ arguments are commonly raised by Indian-based guarantors”.

“It follows a series of similar cases where Indian banks have successfully pursued wilful defaulters in the English courts who are either residing in or have assets in the UK, or where the finance agreements are subject to English law and jurisdiction. This shows that this can be a successful enforcement route when pursued properly and under the right circumstances.”

TLT is also currently advising the consortium of 13 Indian banks on a £1.05 billion debt recovery action in the UK against Mallya.

Related posts

Seeking refuge in US, children fleeing danger are expelledWhen officers led them out of a detention facility near the US-Mexico border and onto a bus last month, the 12-year-old from Honduras and his 9-year-old sister believed they were going to a shelter so they could be reunited with their mother in the Midwest. They had been told to sign a paper they thought would tell the shelter they didn’t have the coronavirus, the boy said. The form was in English, a language he and his sister don’t speak. The only thing he recognized was the letters “Covid.” Instead, the bus drove five hours to an airport where the children were told to board a plane. “They lied to us,” he said. “They didn’t tell us we were going back to Honduras.” More than 2,000 unaccompanied children have been expelled since March under an emergency declaration enacted by the Trump administration, which has cited the coronavirus in refusing to provide them protections under federal anti-trafficking and asylum laws. Lawyers and advocates have sharply criticized the administration for using the global pandemic as a pretext to deport children to places of danger. No U.S. agents looked at the video the boy had saved on his cellphone showing a hooded man holding a rifle, saying his name, and threatening to kill him and his sister, weeks after the uncle caring for them was shot dead in June. And even though they were expelled under an emergency declaration citing the virus, they were never tested for COVID-19, the boy said. Three weeks after their uncle was killed, the children fled Honduras, crossing the U.S.-Mexico border alone. Under the normal process set out by U.S. law, they would have been referred to a government facility for youth and eventually placed with their mother. Instead, they were expelled on July 24 after three days in U.S. detention and now live in Honduras with another uncle who is looking to leave the country himself. U.S. Customs and Border Protection declined multiple requests for comment on the boy’s story, and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement also declined, saying the children had been in Border Patrol custody until they boarded a deportation flight operated by ICE. Spokesmen for both agencies have refused to answer most questions about how they treat roughly 70,000 adults and children expelled under the emergency declaration issued in March. They have refused to say how they decide whether to expel children or where to detain them before expulsion, including in hotels where at least 150 unaccompanied children as young as 1 year old have been held. Much of what’s known about expulsions has come from the accounts of children like the 12-year-old boy, who recounted his experience to The Associated Press last week with a recall of details that makes him seem older.

On Punjab

For Mahatma Gandhi’s 150th birth anniversary, Govt schools in Rajasthan to remove ‘Harijan’ from their names

On Punjab

Trump to make Mar-a-Lago estate permanent home after leaving White House

On Punjab