SAM and Co litigation team appeals HC on warrant issued against Yu Tele-ventures

Image
ANI New Delhi
Last Updated : Dec 16 2015 | 12:57 PM IST

In a temporary yet significant development, the Dispute Resolution Team of SAM and Co (acting on behalf of Yu Tele-ventures and its three directors, Rahul Sharma, Sumeet Kumar and Vikas Jain) successfully appealed against the order of the Learned Single Judge of the Delhi High Court. The Learned Single Judge had held Yu Tele-ventures and the individual Directors guilty of contempt of Court and issued bail-able warrants against them.

The Litigation Team of Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas led by Ajit Warrier, Partner, Sandeep Grover, Principal Associate, Aditya Nayyar, Associate and Shreya Munoth, Associate filed an appeal against the order of the learned single judge. In addition to the firm's lawyers, senior advocates P.V. Kapur, Sandeep Sethi and Dayan Krishnan were engaged by SAM and Co for the two appeals.

There were two sets of appeal, one filed on behalf of Yu Tele-ventures and the other on behalf of the individual Directors. The said appeals were heard by a Division Bench comprising the Chief Justice G. Rohini and Justice Rajiv Sahai.

As a background, the contempt petition was filed in a suit which Ericsson has filed against Micromax. The Single Judge, while adjudicating the contempt issue on an application filed by Ericsson, observed that there were common Directors for both Micromax and its wholly owned subsidiary, Yu Tele-ventures. The Learned Single Judge held that "while in corporate entity may be a separate juristic person, it is nevertheless managed and run by human beings who give it direction and substance" and lifted the corporate veil.

On lifting the corporate veil, the Learned Single Judge had observed that, "the corporate veil can be pierced and the parent company can be held liable for the conduct of its subsidiary.

The division bench of the Delhi HC, while setting aside the single judge's order, noted that the learned single judge had not heard the appellants in the appeals and had proceeded on an erroneous basis.

The division bench observes that, "That being the case, we are of the view that the finding of the learned Single Judge in the order under appeal that they are guilty of contempt cannot be treated as conclusive."

The division bench further held that the appellants "shall subject themselves to the contempt proceedings and shall appear on December 15 through their respective counsels".

At the hearing on December 15 before the Ld. Single judge, the personal presence of directors was dispensed with. Further, Yu Tele-ventures, purely as an interim arrangement, have tendered interim payments to Ericsson without prejudice to all its rights and contentions.

*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

More From This Section

First Published: Dec 16 2015 | 12:49 PM IST

Next Story