SC dismisses Vijay Mallya’s review plea1 min read . Updated: 31 Aug 2020, 10:53 PM IST
A bench comprising justices U.U. Lalit and Ashok Bhushan on 27 August had reserved its order after hearing arguments in the case
The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed fugitive businessman Vijay Mallya’s review petition against its 2017 order holding him guilty of contempt of court. The court had convicted Mallya for transferring $40 million to his children in violation of its order.
A bench comprising justices U.U. Lalit and Ashok Bhushan on 27 August had reserved its order after hearing arguments in the case.
The case had been adjourned previously as the reply filed by Mallya could not be found in the case record of the apex court.
On 19 June, the top court had sought an explanation from its registry as to why Mallya’s review petition had not been listed for the past three years before the court.
The registry had been directed to furnish details of all the officials involved in dealing with the review petition files during these years.
On 9 May 2017, Mallya was convicted for contempt of court for not truthfully disclosing his assets and transferring assets to his family despite the court’s order against the transfer. Mallya, who is an accused in a bank loan default case of more than ₹9,000 crore involving his defunct Kingfisher Airlines, is currently in the UK.
The apex court’s 2017 order had come on a plea by a consortium of banks led by the State Bank of India (SBI), which had said that Mallya had allegedly transferred $40 million received from British firm Diageo, to his children in “flagrant violation" of various judicial orders.
The apex court was dealing with pleas of lending banks seeking contempt action and a direction to Mallya to deposit the $40 million received Diageo with the banks.
The SC has asked Mallya to appear in court on the next date of hearing—5 October. The order stated, “Now that the review petitions are dismissed, we direct respondent No. 3 to appear before this court on 05.10.2020 at 2pm and also direct the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, to facilitate and ensure the presence of respondent No. 3 before this court on that day."