Supreme Court slams Noida, Greater Noida, bank officials; J P Morgan figures in case

Deccan Chronicle.  | Parmod Kumar

Business, In Other News

Banks permitted “diversion of money” immediately after sanctioning of the loan, the court noted.

Pointing to the flaws in the group’s transactions with J.P.Morgan, the court said the group obtained investment from J.P. Morgan in “violation of FEMA and FDI norms” and the “shares were overvalued” for making payment to J.P. Morgan.

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday slammed the officials of the Noida, Greater Noida Authorities and the banks for conniving with Amrapali Group of Com-panies. The court also came down on the group’s transactions with investment bank J. P. Morgan.

“It is apparent from the report of the forensic audit submitted by Forensic Auditors that there is a serious kind of fraud played upon the buyers in active connivance with the officials of the Noida and Greater Noida Authorities and that of the banks. The money of the home buyers has been diverted”, said the bench of Justices Arun Mishra and Uday Umesh Lalit.

In a severe indictment of the affairs at the companies, the apex court noted, “The Directors diverted the money by the creation of dummy companies, realizing professional fees, creating bogus bills, selling flats at undervalue price, payment of excessive brokerage, etc.”

Pointing to the flaws in the group’s transactions with J.P.Morgan, the court said the group obtained investment from J.P. Morgan in “violation of FEMA and FDI norms” and the “shares were overvalued” for making payment to J.P. Morgan.

“It was adopted as a device for siphoning off the money of the home buyers to foreign countries”, the court said, asking the Enforcement Directorate to investigate the matter, including the allegations of money laundering.

Noting that Amrapali Group had large sums of money collected from homebuyers and needed no funding from banks, the court said that the in view of the “huge money collected from the buyers and comparable investments made in the projects, there was no necessity to obtain a loan from banks. The amount so obtained was not used in the projects.”

Banks permitted “diversion of money” immediately after sanctioning of the loan, the court noted.

Read more...