Lunacy

By Ramesh Akkineni

One wonders how the 'wise' judges gave such a judgement which is contrary to the basic concept of 'Property'.

Those shareholders who had come at a later stage and tendered their shares in the open offer would not be eligible for penal interest.

In the Clariant case, the takeover code was triggered when it effected a global takeover of Hoechst AG, the Indian arm of which is Colour Chem.

There were more than three review petitions each, filed by the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi), the Consumer Education & Research Centre (CERC) and the Specified Undertaking Unit Trust of India (SUUTI) and other minority shareholders. The ruling will also affect other cases where the issue of penal interest is being decided upon.

The three-member bench, comprising Justice Santosh Hegde, Justice SB Sinha and Justice AK Mathur, passed a brief order in the second week of March, which said, “We’ve gone through the review petitions and the connected papers. We find no merit therein. The review petitions are accordingly dismissed.”

Earlier, the SC had upheld the order of the Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT) which accepted the contention of the petitioner (CIL) to pay the penal interest only to those shareholders in the open offer who have held on to their holdings from the reference date of 1998.

Earlier, in August 2004, the SC had pronounced its judgement in the Colour Chem Ltd (CCL) case (Clariant vs Sebi). The salient features of the judgement were as follows: interest will be paid at 10% per annum as against 15% directed by Sebi and SAT, dividends since 1998 will be deducted from the amount of interest payable to shareholders and the interest will be paid only to those shareholders who have continuously held/owned the shares since March 22, 1998 till the date of tendering the shares in the open offer, ie. for more than six and a half years. The minority shareholders had pleaded that the concept of transferability and fungibility applicable to equity shares should have been considered by the SC. According to them, all the rights, liabilities, past accrued incomes/losses are constantly and continuously transferred to the new owners whenever an equity share changes hands. Even if one buys shares on the record date/book closure date, one is entitled to full year dividend/right/bonus, even though he owns the shares just for one day before the said date, and effectively he gets the same benefit as a person holding the shares for one full year, they had argued. Similarly, if a person buys the shares today and tomorrow, a ten-year old case is decided against the company, the shareholder cannot claim that he should not be made to suffer the losses of the past deeds of the company. The share price goes down and the new owner will necessarily have to suffer the loss and the old owner of the share has no liability at all, they had said.

Popular posts from this blog

It Pays to be a Nervous Wreck

By Ramesh Akkineni
from an article in Livemint Two weeks ago, Microsoft issued the sort of quarterly report usually seen of a company in finest mettle. Redmond’s sales were up 15% and profit double that, excluding certain deferrals. And the rest of the year, it projected, would be just as sanguine—certainly unlike in the economy as a whole. Elsewhere, that would be a mandate for staying the course. In Redmond, though, they were crossing off days on their calendars, waiting until Friday, the first day of February and thus the first opportunity Microsoft would be able to truthfully state, “Okay, Yahoo, it’s been a year since we talked to you guys; where’s the beef?” Microsoft remains obsessed about Google because it reads the same things everyone else does about how Google’s style of free, “in the cloud” computing means the slow and steady decline of Windows and Office. That’s a technical debate, one in which both sides have good arguments. But....
Read more

Korean Model

By Ramesh Akkineni
from an article by Ha-Joon Chang in the Guardian In my lifetime Korea has lived through one of the greatest development miracles – half a century ago, its annual per capita income was around £50, less than half that of Ghana at the time. Today, it stands at £12,000, putting it on a par with Portugal and Slovenia. How was this possible? Korea of course did things that most people agree are important for economic development, such as investment in infrastructure, health and education. But on top of that, it also practised many policies that are now supposed to be bad for economic development: extensive use of selective industrial policy, combining protectionism with export subsidies; tough regulations on foreign direct investment; active, if not particularly extensive, use of state-owned enterprises; lax protection of patents and other intellectual property rights; heavy regulation of both domestic and international finance. The Korean experience shows that sustainabl...
Read more

Maxims from Poor Richard 3

By Ramesh Akkineni
Image
from Poor Richard's Almanac, 1735 Look before, or you'll find yourself behind. Bad Commentators spoil the best of books, So God sends meat (they say) the devil Cooks. Approve not of him who commends all you say. By diligence and patience, the mouse bit in two the cable. Full of courtesie, full of craft. A little House well fill'd, a little Field well till'd, and a little Wife well will'd, are great Riches. Old Maids lead Apes there, where the old Batchelors are turn'd to Apes. Some are weatherwise, some are otherwise. Dyrro lynn y ddoeth e fydd ddoethach. The poor man must walk to get meat for his stomach, the rich man to get a stomach to his meat. He that goes far to marry, will either deceive or be deceived. Eyes and Priests Bear no Jests. The Family of Fools is ancient. Necessity never made a good bargain. If Pride leads the Van, Beggary brings up the Rear. There's many witty men whose brains can't fill thei...
Read more