Supreme Court disposed SLP of NIAG & Maharashtra Government

Upholds Bombay HC order releasing attachment of 63 moons' assets | This is the second time that SC is disposing of SLP of NIAG

Deepthi | Myequity news | Date : 30-01-2019 16:25:00 IST

Supreme Court has dismissed the Special Leave Petitions (SLP) of NSEL Investor Action Group (NIAG) and Government of Maharashtra, declining to interfere with the Bombay HC order of releasing assets of 63 moons (formerly known as FTIL) attached under the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (MPID) Act. This is the second time the Supreme Court has disposed SLP of NIAG. Earlier, it was dismissed against Mr Jignesh Shah and now against 63 moons. Also, earlier, the Supreme Court had declined to interfere with defamation proceedings filed by 63 moons against Ketan Shah.

The attachments of 63 moons' assets were done through the notifications issued by Maharashtra Government in April 2018 under provisions of MPID act. The Bombay High Court, on October 24, 2018 had passed an interim order staying the attachment of Company's assets under the MPID Act, which included bank accounts and properties. The BHC termed the State's action prima facie excess', arbitrary and unreasonable.

The interim order stayed the attachment of ODIN software, its receivables and also stayed a corrigendum issued whereby accrued returns on investments will became available to 63 Moons. As a result, the Company was allowed to receive periodically accrued benefits on its investments.


The Bombay High Court had observed that various government agencies, including the EOW- Mumbai and Enforcement Directorate have attached properties worth over Rs 8,500 crore owned by the defaulters, promoters and former employees of NSEL till November 2017 as against a defaulted amount of Rs 5,600 crore.

This order was challenged by the State and the NIAG in the Supreme Court and the matter was heard on January 28, 2019. 63 moons was represented by Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi while NIAG was represented by Senior Advocate Mr. Shyam Diwan. After hearing the arguments of both sides, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that it wasn't inclined to interfere with the order of the Bombay High Court. The Supreme Court stated that since this is a matter of importance, it was requesting the Bombay High Court to conclude final hearing of the matter within the month of February itself.


More from Myequity