The Supreme Court entered the case on June 3. (Folder)
New Delhi:
On Wednesday, the Law Enforcement Department informed the Supreme Court that it had joined the assets worth Rs 187 crore of the multinational firm JP Morgan who was allegedly involved in the siphoning of money from buyers of houses of the Amrapali group.
JP Morgan India, on the other hand, denied any wrongdoing and said the seizure of property by the Law Enforcement Branch was clearly illegal as it was not part of any kind of financial transaction with the Amrapali group and it was JP Morgan Singapore and Maurice who would have invested in the real estate group.
A bench of judges Arun Mishra and UU Lalit asked the Law enforcement branch to file a brief response to the grievance raised by JP Morgan India.
During arguments, lead attorney Mukul Rohatgi, representing JP Morgan India, said Tuesday that the Law Enforcement Branch (ED) had joined the account of the multinational firm to recover money to the extent indicated by the instructions of the higher court.
Rohatgi said the foreclosure of properties from JP Morgan India was clearly illegal because the multinational company did not have a penny of investment in the Amrapali group and it was JP Morgan Singapore and Mauritius who put the money in the real estate company .
For that, the bank said the court was concerned with JP Morgan, which had branches all over the world and when a company had branches all over the world, then everything had to be taken into account.
The panel stated that the DE should file a brief response to the application filed by JP Morgan India by the next hearing date.
Lead counsel Harish Salve, appearing for SBICAP, told the superior court that the financial institution is currently following due diligence on the financing of the blocked projects of the Amrapali group and would urge them to release funds to revive the projects.
The bench then said it would hear from SBICAP next week and listed the issue on June 3.
Additional Solicitor General Vikramjeet Banerjee, representing the Center, said that the Ministry of Finance (MoF) has authorized SBICAP for all seed capital funding.
He declared that under the current system where SBICAP is appointed fund manager, any loan or financing of this type is subject to SBI and its investors and asked the court not to issue general instructions which could dilute the standard RBI guidelines.
The bank also reserved its verdict on the issue of the Floor Area Ratio (FAR), the interest to be realized by the authorities of Noida and Greater Noida on these projects and the financing of housing buyers for unsold stocks.
He asked Noida and Greater Noida to be more accommodating regarding the interest rate because the real estate sector would die if the authorities remained rigid.
The bank said the authorities would have to give some easing or all the real estate projects would fail.
The bench also asked lead attorney Siddharth Dave, appearing for the NBCC to submit an organizational chart on their Amrapali blocked projects construction plan for the next two to three months.
He said the NBCC should tell the court how much money it contains, how much money is required in the next three months and how the money could be collected for the pending projects.
The bank asked the NBCC to inform it in a week if it can sell the unsold stocks to raise funds for the pending projects or the court should appoint another agency for this purpose.
On May 22, the Supreme Court authorized ED to seize the properties of JP Morgan, who was involved in transactions with the now-disappeared Amrapali group, to siphon money from home buyers in violation of the law on property. exchange management (FEMA) and FDI standards.
The ED had declared to the superior court that he had at first sight identified Rs 187 Crores in the accounts of JP Morgan, as proceeds of crime under the Law on prevention of money laundering (PMLA) and that he needed permission to join his property in order to recover the same.
Additional solicitor general Sanjay Jain, who was appearing for ED, said on the bench that the investigative agency had so far prima facie identified a crore of Rs 187 in the accounts of JP Morgan, which they claim are products of crime under anti-money laundering law.
On January 13, the Supreme Court orally asked the ED to seize the Indian properties of JP Morgan after the investigation agency declared that it had prima facie found violations of FEMA standards by the American company JP Morgan and that a complaint in this regard had been made.
According to the share subscription agreement between JP Morgan and Amrapali Group, the US-based firm had invested Rs 85 crore on October 20, 2010 to have a preferential claim on profits in a ratio of 75% for JP Morgan and 25% for promoters of Amrapali Homes Project Private Limited and Ultra Home.
Later, the same number of shares was bought back from JP Morgan for a crore of Rs 140 by two companies – M / s Neelkanth and M / s Rudraksha – owned by a peon and a boy from the auditor’s office. Amrapali, Anil Mittal.
On July 23 of last year, the supreme court had broken its whip against stray builders for having abused the confidence of house buyers, ordered the cancellation of the registration of the Amrapali group under RERA real estate law and the ousted from its main properties in the NCR by removing land leases. .
He had ordered an investigation by the ED into the money laundering allegations and to investigate the charge of FEMA violation by JP Morgan.
