About Me

My photo
The Original CHAUKIDAAR ,“TAKEOVER WATCHMAN” since 2007. CA. Arun Goenka* hands-on experience in the share market* deep knowledge of laws and account*one of the early players, pioneered an investment strategy in TAKEOVERS*The WIRC - of The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India, has honoured him with the ‘Recognition of CAs in Social Service’. * often invited by National business news; electronic and print media, for his views on SEBI related matters. * history of red-flagging 100+ cases to SEBI* contributes by giving inputs in drafting amendments to the regulation* Some of the suggestions reflected in subsequent regulatory changes: (a). In takeover of Cairn 3,750 Crores non-compete fees waived off and ultimately Removal of Non-compete fee in 2011 (b) November 2009 amending Regulation 11 (1). (c)Listing agreement baring promoters from voting on related party. (d) Disclosure of past performance by merchant bankers in case of IPO (e) SAST 2011 regulation 10(1)(h), (f) Counter Offer in case of Delisting (g) Interest payment to all in case of delays in Open Offers(05.06.20).

Monday, November 18, 2019

Fortis Open Offer; Supreme Court order dated November 15, 2019


Reg. Fortis Open Offer- SC order analysed 

CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 2120 OF 2018
IN
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 20417 OF 2017

My key takeaways on Fortis SC order dated November 15, 2019

·       Supreme Court had asked status quo to be maintained with respect to the controlling  stake in Fortis hospital.
·       SC originally ordered on 11th  August 2017 and  clarified on 31st  August 2017. Subsequent to  this clarification any sale/transfer of shares by FHHL after 31st August 2017 will not be allowed by the Honorable Supreme Court.
·       Indiabulls and India ventures have transferred the shares in violation of this order and are held as contemnor.
·       On 9th January 2019 Fortis filed an application in SC and stated that transaction between Fortis and IHH was completed on 13. 11. 2018
·       On 15th  January 2019 Daiichi filed in SC a prayer to restrain Fortis from transferring  4000 crores received from IHHH to Singapore based RHT. Fortis said it has already been transferred on 15.01.2019. The most important w.r.t. Open offer,  is  para 48  given below:
·        
I.A. No.8948 of 2019 was filed by the petitioner on
15.01.2019 stating that FHL is proposing to transfer Rs.4,000/-
crores approximately, received by it [as a result of the transferring
of shares to the IHH Healthcare Bhd. (Malaysian Company)] to RHT Health Trust, Singapore (RHT). Petitioner prayed for restraining this transfer of funds and compliance of order dated 14.12.2018.FHL filed a reply to this I.A., which made it apparent that on15.01.2019 itself FHL had completed the transaction involving acquisition of assets from Singapore based RHT even though it was fully aware that this Court was seized of the matter

·       What is the all important order dated  14.12.2018?

PARA 47 OF THE SC ORDER

47. However, we cannot let the matters stand as they are. On
14.12.2018, this Court had passed the following order:

“Issue notice.
The personal presence of the alleged respondents contemnors
is dispensed with for the present.

Status quo with regard to sale of the controlling stake
in Fortis Healthcare to Malaysian IHH Healthcare Berhad
be maintained.”

The order directs that the status quo with respect to the sale of
controlling stake in FHL to IHH Healthcare Bhd. (Malaysian
Company) should be maintained. We are now told that this sale
had already taken place. This matter needs to be enquired into
and we have to be certain when this sale actually took place and
when was the controlling stake in FHL transferred to the IHH
Healthcare Bhd. (Malaysian Company). Furthermore, on
09.01.2019, FHL moved an application in this Court and stated
that the transaction between the FHL and IHH Healthcare Bhd.
(Malaysian Company) had been completed on 13.11.2018 and
prayed that the order dated 14.12.2018 be modified insofar as it
pertains to sale of controlling stake in IHH Healthcare Bhd.
(Malaysian Company).

Some questions arise:

1.     If the sale had already taken place on 13.11.2018 before the SC order dated 14.12.2018 , why any modification of the that order was prayed for? 

2.     Does the Status-quo order of SC restrain the Open Offer?  Through the Open offer controlling  stake in Fortis is not being sold. Admittedly, Open Offer will help in completing the compliance.
3.     Can Open offer once announced be cancelled? My understanding is quite clear, it cannot be cancelled even if the underlying transaction triggering the open offer fails.
4.     Should legal compliance be restrained? Even when it has no damaging effect on the petitioner or his prayers?
5.     Daichii has not prayed for cancellation/stay/status –quo on sale of controlling stake in FHL.
6.     Daichii’s concern is not the ownership or management of Fortis, its only concern is Funds. Daichii would like to receive the funds rather than it being transferred to MMS & SMS or their entities.
7.     The funds brought in by IHHH for the open offer are lying in Escrow account, would not it be more prudent to allow the Open offer to be completed and if required, the shares acquired in the Open offer be frozen till such time the SC decides?

In the light of the above, may we humbly request you to please intervene in the matter and enlighten the Hon’ble Supreme Court that its order staying the Open offer is  :
1.       Causing misery and loss to thousands of small shareholders.
2.       Causing hindrance in completion of mandatory legal compliance
3.       It does not any way help the Petitioner’s (Daichii) cause
4.       The Petitioner did not even pray for such a stay order.
5.       The petitioner is only concerned with the diversion of funds and the pay out for Open Offer will not go in the hands of FHL or Singh brothers. The payment of about Rs.3,400 Crores will go to thousands of small investors.
6.       If Hon’ble Supreme Court so desires, it may make restraining orders/freeze on the shares acquired in the Open offer.
7.       For the period of delay, the small shareholders must be compensated with interest.
Your immediate action will go a long way in helping the small shareholders.

Thanks & Regards,

For Small Investors’ Welfare Association

Arun Goenka
Authorised Signatory,

Sunday, November 17, 2019

My key takeaways on Fortis SC order dated November 15, 2019



CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 2120 OF 2018
IN
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 20417 OF 2017

My key takeaways on Fortis SC order dated November 15, 2019

·       Supreme Court had asked status quo to be maintained with respect to the shareholding in Fortis hospital.

·       SC originally ordered on 11th  August 2017 and  clarified on 31st  August 2017. Subsequent to  this clarification any sale/transfer of shares by FHHL after 31st August 2017 will not be allowed by the Honorable Supreme Court.

·       Indiabulls and India ventures have transferred the shares in violation of this order and are held as contemnor.

·       On 9th January 2019 Fortis filed in application in SC and stated that transaction between Fortis and IHH has been completed on 13. 11. 2018
·       On 15th  January 2019 Daiichi filed in SC a prayer to restrain Fortis from transferring  4000 crores received from IHHH to Singapore based RHT. Forrtis said it has already been transferred on 15.01.2019. The most important w.r.t. Open offer,   para 48 is given below:
·        
I.A. No.8948 of 2019 was filed by the petitioner on
15.01.2019 stating that FHL is proposing to transfer Rs.4,000/-
crores approximately, received by it [as a result of the transferring
of shares to the IHH Healthcare Bhd. (Malaysian Company)] to RHT Health Trust, Singapore (RHT). Petitioner prayed for restraining this transfer of funds and compliance of order dated 14.12.2018.FHL filed a reply to this I.A., which made it apparent that on15.01.2019 itself FHL had completed the transaction involving acquisition of assets from Singapore based RHT even though it was fully aware that this Court was seized of the matter

·       What is the all important order dated  14.12.2018?

PARA 47 OF THE SC ORDER

47. However, we cannot let the matters stand as they are. On
14.12.2018, this Court had passed the following order:

“Issue notice.
The personal presence of the alleged respondentscontemnors
is dispensed with for the present.

Status quo with regard to sale of the controlling stake
in Fortis Healthcare to Malaysian IHH Healthcare Berhad
be maintained.”

The order directs that the status quo with respect to the sale of
controlling stake in FHL to IHH Healthcare Bhd. (Malaysian
Company) should be maintained. We are now told that this sale
had already taken place. This matter needs to be enquired into
and we have to be certain when this sale actually took place and
when was the controlling stake in FHL transferred to the IHH
Healthcare Bhd. (Malaysian Company). Furthermore, on
09.01.2019, FHL moved an application in this Court and stated
that the transaction between the FHL and IHH Healthcare Bhd.
(Malaysian Company) had been completed on 13.11.2018 and
prayed that the order dated 14.12.2018 be modified insofar as it
pertains to sale of controlling stake in IHH Healthcare Bhd.
(Malaysian Company).

Some questions arise:

1.     If the sale had already taken place on 13.11.2018 before the SC order dated 14.12.2018 , why any modification of the that order was prayed for? 

2.     Does the Status-quo order of SC restrain the Open Offer?  Through the Open offer controlling  stake in Fortis is not being sold. Admittedly, Open Offer will help in completing the compliance.
3.     Can Open offer once announced be cancelled? My understanding is quite clear, it cannot be cancelled even if the underlying transaction triggering the open offer fails.
4.     Should legal compliance be restrained? Even when it has no damaging effect on the petitioner or his prayers?

5.     Daichii’s concern is not the ownership or management of Fortis, its only concern is Funds. Daichii would like to receive the funds rather than it being transferred to MMS & SMS or their entities.
6.     The funds brought in by IHHH for the open offer are lying in Escrow account, would not it be more prudent to allow the Open offer to be completed and if required, the shares acquired in the Open offer be frozen till such time the SC decides?


Saturday, September 14, 2019

Polo Hotels Takeover

Re. Polo Hotels Ltd.  Open Offer Your order dated June 3, 2019 and

As stated in my letter dated 30th July 2019 the perennial defaulters –DAHIYA have till now not  deposited Rs.11.95 Crs. in the escrow account as per SEBI order dated June 3, 2019.

To enforce the regulation on a defiant promoter who has been dodging the law for 2 decades, and to protect the investors and mitigate their suffering, SEBI will have to think of out of box solutions.

I very strongly  urge you to please take immediate steps in a two pronged strategy.

A. Investor protection

B. Enforcing the Regulation on the rogue acquirer.



Investor protection

Investors have been suffering for the last 20 years. Please complete the Open Offer out of huge accumulation in the IPEF. This will be the right use of the funds collected in the name of Investor protection.   I am not able to recollect any significant use of the funds collected for investor protection, apart from some paltry amount spent on advertisement and seminars. In case the funds are not used for the right purpose, the Government of India has already declared its intentions of asking the funds to be deposited with them.

Enforcing the Regulation on the rogue acquirer.

Please  examine all the powers and provisions that you have to enforce your order of June 3, 2019.

Individual Net worth of 3 acquirers as  given in the Draft Letter of Offer is as follows:

a)   Mr. Amardeep Singh Dahiya --Rs. 1,172.95 /- lakhs only.

b)   Mr. Abhey Ram Dahiya Rs. 2,585.29/- lakhs only.

c)    Mr. Pankaj Dahiya  Rs. 78.89/- lakhs only.



Thus the combined Net worth of the defaulting Acquirers  is Rs. 3835.89 Lakhs. If they are not depositing and complying with your orders, it is  a case of sheering defiance. You may think of obtaining a decree on these assets or taking a possession of these assets in the same way as banks are now doing to realise their funds.  In my earlier letter I have already given you the detailed process that you may like to follow. 





1.    It will not be out of place to mention here that as per the Regulation 22 & 23 of SAST 1997, the Acquirers are not entitled to sit on the Board of the company till such time they have completed the offer or deposited 100% of the amount in an Escrow account.

2.    Immediately remove DAHIYA and their nominees from the management of the company. As you are aware,  the hotel business is that of cash sales which can be easily manipulated. I had personally stayed in the hotel  for 3 days and observed the activities and interviewed various employees. The hotel is doing well and my guess estimate is that not even 10% of the revenue is being reported in the books. This is a major source of regular income for the promoter family who is not bothered about their bank a/c being frozen. 

3.    As provided in Regulation 44 (a) appoint a merchant banker for  selling share of the defaulting  acquirer

4.    As provided in Regulation 44 (d) Freeze the  voting or other rights  on these shares.( You have already frozen the DP account.)

5.    Expedite   prosecution proceedings against Mr. Abhey Ram Dahiya, Mr. Amardeep Dahiya and Mr. Pankaj Dahiya.

6.    The company has not held its AGM for the last 2 years.



I may once again appeal to you to not to hold the funds lying in the IPEF a/c too close to your chest. Please use it for the purpose it was instituted and pay to the investors who have been suffering for 20 years, else the government has already shown its intention of taking over all such funds from you.

Shall be obliged to hear from you and for your immediate action

Saturday, July 20, 2019

MINDTREE TAKEOVER BY L&T


L & T has been stretching/ bending/ ignoring/ violating the regulations and propriety and getting away with it. All our pleas to SEBI have fallen on deaf ears. SEBI has not taken any action against  L & T. Rather SEBI has taken action against persons objecting to  L & T takeover of Mindtree. As per the press report  Nalanda surrendered and tendered its shares in the Open Offer because of SEBI notice to them. Nalanda felt threatened that they will be asked by SEBI to announce an Open Offer as they will be construed as PAC.
On the one hand SEBI has been trying to stretch its regulations to brand a person showing common cause with the promoter , as PAC, yet on the other hand SEBI has been ignoring all the wrong doings of  L & T, even when repeatedly pointed out by us. The impression being created is that SEBI has ignored the interest of small investors and appears to be playing ball with L & T.
The following questions remain unanswered till date:
1.   ATTEMPT TO BEAT THE REGULATION-- OPEN OFFER IN VIOLATION OF  THE TAKEOVER CODE 2011-The SAST 2011 does not allow voluntary offer by any third party. This is a departure from the earlier 1997 code. As per Regulation 6(1) of SAST 2011, only  persons holding 25% or more can bring a voluntary Open offer.
2.   FALSE DECLARATION IN THE PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT—wrongfully stated -this is a mandatory open offer.  incorrect to say that “This Open Offer is a mandatory open offer made in compliance with Regulations 3(1) and 4”

3.   FALSE AND CONTRADICTORY DECLARATION IN THE PRESS RELEASE-  The press release said 
“ Immediately following the filing of the Public Announcement, L & T has placed an order with its broker for on-market purchase of up to 15% of share capital of Mindtree at a price not exceeding INR 980 per share”. 
This statement is in contradiction with the statement made in the PA which said

pursuant to execution of the SPA and proposal for placing of the Purchase Order” 
It an admitted fact that only a proposal was there for placing of the purchase order. There was no actual placement of an order. L & T was in no position to place such an order. They have stated the order could be placed only after receipt of regulatory approvals. An order to the share broker is a definitive order.  An order placed for a specific number of shares up to a limit price, in this case 2.48 Crs. Shares, to be bought  up to INR 980 will make the broker buy all the shares available in the market at a price at or below 980 till the desired quantity of 2.48 Crs. Shares is achieved. But this was never the case. In the Economic Times dated March 28, 2019, experts like Ex. Director of SEBI Shri JN Gupta and senior advocate Shri Rajesh Begur of ARA Law this was wrong on the part of  L & T- (a) the order was not actionable and (b) “They don’t need CCI approval to reach 25 per cent,”

4.   MALA-FIDE INTENTION OF L & T.—L&T acted in a great haste and without fulfilling legal & regulatory requirements with a   mala-fide intention to pre-empt the Board of MINDTREE who had notified the stock Exchange on 15-03-2019 that the meeting of the Board of Directors of the Company is scheduled on 20-03-2019, inter alia, to consider and approve Buyback of  equity shares of the Company. L & T successfully thwarted this meeting and the Board meeting of Mindtree had to be adjourned. The moment any Public Announcement is made for takeover of any company, Regulation 26 places several restrictions on the Target company. Under such circumstances  no buy back can be done without passing a special Resolution.
5.   UNWARRANTED DPS ISSUED ON 26.03.19 in violation of the Regulation—The Detailed Public Statement (DPS) issued by L&T is totally unwarranted and a misuse of the process of law. Till date  L&T has not purchased from open market,  or even paced a definitive order on its broker for purchase of shares as was falsely claimed. There  is no question of L&T triggering an Open Offer. Regulation 13(4) specifically provides that even if PA has been issued but  the acquirer does not succeed in acquiring the ability to exercise or direct the exercise of voting rights in, or control over the target company,” then there is no need to make any DPS. The relevant portion is extracted below:
Explanation.— It is clarified that in the event the acquirer does not succeed in acquiring the ability to exercise or direct the exercise of voting rights in, or control over the target company, the acquirer shall not be required to make a detailed public statement of an open offer for acquiring shares under these regulations.         
6.   MANIPULATION OF RECORD DATE FOR PAYMENT OF SPECIAL DIVIDEND
On 9th April the company announced the record date (RD) 
The Record Date for payment of Interim &/ Special Dividend, if approved, will be April 27, 2019.” 
Accordingly the future was trading at a substantial discount to cash segment. The closing price of the shares on 16.04.19 in cash segment was 972.50 whereas in the future it was 10 lower. This is understandable because the Ex date is 25.04.19 which is also the settlement date.
On 17th April 2019 the company has declared that :
The Final Dividend and the Special Dividend are payable subject to the approval of Shareholders at the Twentieth Annual General Meeting.”
(The complete text of the messages copied from BSE website are appended below for detailed scrutiny. )
EXTRACTS FROM COMPANY NOTICE
Exchange Received Time 09-04-2019 17:10:19 Exchange Disseminated Time 09-04-2019 17:10:26 Time Taken 00:00:07
Notice pursuant to Regulation 29 of SEBI (Listing Obligations and Disclosure Requirements) Regulations 2015, be and is hereby given that the meeting of the Board of Directors of the Company will be held on Wednesday, April 17, 2019, inter alia, to consider the audited financial results of the Company for the quarter and year ended March 31, 2019, to consider declaration of interim &/ special dividend, if any and also the recommendation of final dividend, if any, amongst other matters.

The Record Date for payment of Interim &/ Special Dividend, if approved, will be April 27, 2019.

Exchange Received Time  17/04/2019 13:55:20         Exchange Disseminated Time   17/04/2019 13:55:23              Time Taken   00:00:03
MindTree Ltd has informed BSE that the Board of Directors of the Company at its meeting held on April 17, 2019, inter alia, has recommended a Final Dividend of 40% (Rs. 4 per equity share of face value of Rs. 10/- each) for the financial year ended March 31, 2019 and a Special Dividend of 200% (Rs. 20/- per equity share of face value of Rs. 10/- each) to celebrate the twin achievements of exceeding USD 1 billion annual revenue milestone and 20th anniversary of the Company.

The Final Dividend and the Special Dividend are payable subject to the approval of Shareholders at the Twentieth Annual General Meeting.

7.   ATTEMPT TO ILLEGALLY DEPRIVE  SMALL INVESTORS FOR MORE THAN 100 CRS.
It is obvious that there is an attempt by  L & T to cheat the minority shareholders of more than Rs.100 Crores ( Rupees one hundred Crores) Dividend of  Rs.20 on 5.13 Crore shares. List of dates :
·       8th July 2019 -The revised record date for the Special Dividend and Final dividend
·       28.06.19 closing of the offer
·       12.07.19. payment date
·       8.07.19. No ownership can be passed on to L & T till that date.
·       L & T pre-poned the date of payment in an attempt to enrich themselves with dividend that rightfully belongs to the small shareholders. L & T cannot be allowed to take advantage of the dividend and the entire dividend @ 24 ( Special Dividend 20 and Final dividend 4) should be passed on to the shareholders  who have tendered  the shares.
In their Letter of Offer also it is specifically mentioned that till the date of the Letter of offer all rights to dividend etc. will lie with the  shareholders tendering the share :

6.1.2 The Equity Shares tendered under this Offer shall be fully paid-up, free from all liens, charges, equitable interests and encumbrances and shall be tendered together with all rights attached thereto, including all rights to dividends, bonuses and rights offers, if any, declared hereafter, and the tendering Shareholder shall have obtained all necessary consents for it to sell the Equity Shares on the foregoing basis.    

·       MINDTREE  has a history of paying Special dividend. Special dividends in the past were considered as Interim Dividend and paid out accordingly. In this case also, special dividend was bunched together with interim Dividend with RD of 27.04.19 but later on the record date was shifted to 8th July 19.
On 9th April the company announced:
The Record Date for payment of Interim &/ Special Dividend, if approved, will be April 27, 2019.” 
·       The market takes that dividend has been declared on the day the Board announces the dividend and the record date. The impact on the price of Future stock is a proof of this. Scrips where dividend has been declared will be quoted higher in the cash segment and lower in the Future segment. (except for some unique cases where the dividend is higher than 5% of the market price and hence adjustable in the Future price.) Same is the case in MINDTREE.
·       It may be argued that technically a dividend is declared upon approval by shareholders but interim dividend is paid out without any such approval. For all practical purposes, even a final dividend is considered to have been declared when it is announced by the Board and its Record date is announced.
8.   OFFER PRICE CANNOT BE ALLOWED TO BE REVISED LOWER
As per Regulation 8, the Offer Price cannot be lower than the price at which the Acquirer has acquired the shares. This price is 980 as per the PA dated 18th March 2019. At that time the special dividend of Rs.20 was nowhere in sight. In case the dividend of 20 is not given to the Shareholders who have tendered the shares, it will tantamount to reduction in the share price by Rs. 20. The effective Offer price will reduce to 960 only as against the Offer price of 980.
9.   OFFER LETTER INDICATES DIVIDEND TO TENDERING SHAREHOLDERS
Even the scheduled dates of activity indicate that the shareholders should get the dividend. The scheduled date of payment (12.07.19) was after the record date for dividend (08.07.19). L & T would not have been the owner of the shares and could not have got the dividend. It seems, just to be able to get the dividend, although in violation of the basic terms of Offer etc.  L & T pre-poned the date of payment and released the payment before the record date. 
10.  LOSS OF THOUSANDS OF CRORES IN MARKET CAP AFTER L7T TAKEOVER
Investors in Mindtree have lost heavily because of L & T taking over the company. The market price  of the company shares have crashed to 675 from a peak of 1183 resulting in loss of thousands of crores to the investors. 
We pray to you to:
1.    Reply to the above points immediately.
2.    Take appropriate action to protect the interest of small shareholders and ensure that the special dividend of Rs.20 and the Final dividend of Rs.4 is paid out to them.
3.    To initiate disciplinary action against L & T for the above violation.
4.    To instruct  L & T to complete their committed purchase order for 2.48 Crore shares.
5.    In case you are not in able to appreciate our above points, please give us an appealable order so that in case some of the investors feel extremely distressed, they may escalate the matter and file appropriate appeals.