New Delhi: Embattled businessman Vijay Mallya failed to appear in Supreme Court on Monday in a contempt case filed by a consortium of banks led by SBI. The apex court, which had held Mallya guilty of contempt, fixed the matter for hearing on July 14.


COMMERCIAL BREAK
SCROLL TO CONTINUE READING

A bench comprising of Justices A K Goel and U U Lalit fixed the matter for hearing on July 14 and sought the assistance of the Solicitor General in the case.


The apex court had on May 9 held Mallya, who is presently in the United Kingdom, guilty of contempt on a plea by the consortium of lender banks, led by the State Bank of India, for his failure to furnish details of all his Indian as well as offshore assets.


It had directed Mallya to appear before it today to argue on the quantum of punishment.


The offence of contempt of court entails a maximum imprisonment of up to six months or a fine of upto Rs 2,000 or both.


India had recently asked Britain to ensure early extradition of Mallya, who is an accused in a bank loan default case of over Rs 9,000 crore involving his defunct Kingfisher Airlines.


The apex court's order had come on a plea by the consortium of banks, led by the State Bank of India (SBI), which had said that Mallya had allegedly transferred USD 40 million received from British firm Diageo to his children in "flagrant violation" of various judicial orders.


The banks had argued before the court that Mallya had wilfully disobeyed the orders and made "vague" disclosure about his assets.


The top court had on March 9 asked the liquor baron about the "truthfulness" of the disclosure of assets by him and the transfer of money to his children.


The bench had reserved its order on two pleas of lending banks seeking contempt action and a direction to Mallya to deposit USD 40 million received from offshore firm Diageo respectively.


The banks have alleged that Mallya had concealed the facts and diverted the money to his son Siddharth Mallya and daughters Leanna Mallya and Tanya Mallya in "flagrant violation" of the orders passed by the Karnataka High Court.


In October last year, the court had rapped Mallya for not making full disclosure of his overseas properties and had asked him to do so within a month.


The bench had also pulled up Mallya for not giving details of USD 40 million which he had allegedly received from Diageo in February last year, saying it was of the "prima facie view" that proper disclosure as per its earlier order was not made.


The banks had on August 29 last year told the Supreme Court that Mallya had deliberately not made full disclosure of his assets including the USD 40 million he received on February 25 from Diageo. 


The apex court in May had held Mallya guilty of contempt of court for disobeying its orders by not disclosing full particulars of his assets and also violating the orders of Karnataka High Court by transferring USD 40 million received from British firm Diageo, to his three children.


The court had also directed the Union Home Ministry to "secure and ensure" the presence of embattled businessman Vijay Mallya, who is currently in the United Kingdom, before it on July 10.


India had recently asked Britain to ensure early extradition of Mallya, who is an accused in a bank loan default case of over Rs 9,000 crore involving his defunct Kingfisher Airlines.


The offence of contempt of court entails a maximum imprisonment of up to six months or a fine of upto Rs 2,000 or both.


The apex court's order came on a plea by the consortium of banks, led by the State Bank of India (SBI), which had said that Mallya had not disclosed full particulars of his assets and violated various judicial orders.


In its verdict, the bench had noted that the orders passed by the apex court were "clear and unambiguous" and Mallya was called upon to make complete disclosure of his assets.


With PTI Inputs