Bar&Bench News Network
The Supreme Court on Thursday opined that Reliance Industries Ltd (RIL) cannot deny knowledge of the Ambani family pact between the Ambani brothers, brokered by their mother Kokilaben [pictured]. "Mukesh Ambani had a copy of the Memorandum of Understanding?" the Bench asked. To the affirmative response received from Harish Salve, "So you cannot say RIL did not know of the MoU," they retorted.
Reliance Natural Resources Ltd (RNRL) counsel Ram Jethmalani wants to cross examine the seven directors of RIL, whose affidavits claim they had no knowledge of the contents of the family pact, in the event that the Supreme Court admitted the evidence of the directors. He argued that the affidavits were not presented to the Bombay High Court.
The Bench made the observation amid RIL counsel's ongoing arguments that the family pact was "in the private domain" and "not in the corporate domain" and thus, not binding on his client company.
In a related development, Additional Solicitor General Mohan Parasaran has denied reports that he had threatened to quit if Senior Counsel P.P. Rao was briefed. Last week, he wrote to the Petroleum Secretary R.S. Pandey saying he had never threatened to withdraw from the case or resign as ASG, official sources said.
The government had, in consultation with Parasaran, expanded its legal team last month by including Additional Solicitor General Vivek Tankha. "I wish to unequivocally state that the statement that I threatened to withdraw from the case or resign from my office as ASG is not correct and is denied," Parasaran wrote to the Oil Ministry on November 7.
|
Be the first to post a comment 
Related Stories
- Reliance Saga, Act II, Part I: Salve, Jethmalani squabble, ASG threatens to quit
- ASGs Parasaran and Tankha on Gas Policy; Jethmalani objects Govt involvement; Salve fumes on Twitter
- Courtroom Drama - Salve, Jethmalani, Parasaran squabble
- Satyam Scandal: JSA tries hard to get PwC to cross-examine the Rajus
- Reliance saga, Day 4: Salve tests Jethmalani's patience
- Reliance Saga, Days 5 and 6: Jethmalani accuses Government of siding with RIL as Salve concludes arguments
- Anil turns up in court; Jethmalani continues
Other News
- Re-Upped Round up May 21
- Clasis Law moves to a larger office space in Delhi
- Re-Upped Round up May 18
- SC to hear petition challenging appointment of sitting AP High Court judge; Petition alleges deliberate concealment of pending criminal investigation at the time of enrollment
- Linklaters Managing Associate Pranav Sharma to rejoin Amarchand Mangaldas as Partner
- Re-Upped Round up May 17
- Recruitment Tracker: Luthra top recruiter followed by Amarchand and AZB for NALSAR Class of 2012
The Viewpoint: Indemnification Provisions - Is the fight on the indemnity clause worth the effort?
May 17, 2012 | Bar & Bench brings to you the twentieth article on 'The Viewpoint' series with its Knowledge Partner AZB & Partners. AZB Senior Associate Nandish Vyas and Associate Pranati Ishwar in this article seek to examine the context in which indemnification rights are relevant for acquisition transactions, and also seek to explore if there are areas where they are potentially not worth the comments (4)










