Moneycontrol
HomeNewsBusinessBanksWhat 6 Indian banks vs Singapore’s GVK unpaid loans case in London high court is all about
Trending Topics

What 6 Indian banks vs Singapore’s GVK unpaid loans case in London high court is all about

GVK group's GVK Coal Developers had borrowed $1 billion and $159,973,008 from six Indian banks, in 2011 and 2014, to fund its interests in Australian coal and infrastructure projects. While the loans remain unpaid, GVK tried to sell Bengaluru and Mumbai airports without the banks' knowledge.

October 15, 2023 / 13:23 IST
Story continues below Advertisement

Singapore's GVK Coal Developers owes $1 billion and $159,973,008 to six Indian banks. (Photo: Monstera Production via Pexels)

GVK tried to sell Bengaluru and Mumbai airports without the knowledge of six Indian banks whom it owed $1 billion and $159,973,008 under two loan facilities disbursed in 2011 and 2014, respectively. These loans still remain unpaid and are now the subject of a trial in the high court in London. On the very first day of the trial on Tuesday, 10 October, GVK made an application to adjourn the proceedings, which was rejected by the judge Dame Clare Moulder.

In documents lodged with the court, Indian banks have submitted that the “defendants have borrowed large sums of money under sophisticated and detailed contracts. They have twice tried to alienate their assets, the Bengaluru airport and the Mumbai airport, without the knowledge of the lenders.” From the sale of the Bengaluru airport, GVK paid $83 million after negotiating with Indian banks to not go ahead with an injunction against the sale.

Story continues below Advertisement

Facing such damning allegations and unpaid loans for over a decade, GVK’s first move was to seek adjournment through an Indian lawyer who in the first place was not given rights of audience by the court. The Indian banks — Bank of Baroda, Bank of India, Canara Bank, ICICI Bank Limited, Indian Overseas Bank, Axis Bank — represented by barrister Karishma Vora, instructed by Gautam Bhattacharyya and Akshay Sevak of Reed Smith, opposed the adjournment application citing, among other issues, the defendants’ history of changing legal teams. So the trial continues to which we come later after a brief description of the dispute.

The case