SC attaches Amrapali properties, ‘benami’ villa
The Supreme Court on Tuesday attached Amrapali Group’s 100-bed multi-speciality hospital, bank accounts, the building which houses its office, certain firms and a "benami" Villa in Goa. The top court asked the Chief Financial Officer Chander Wadhwa to deposit Rs 11.69 crore with its registry within three weeks. It also asked a statutory auditor Anil Mittal to pay Rs 47 lakh.
The court further restrained the firm from alienating its companies through which it had transactions and ordered attachment of such firms.
The group was also restrained from creating any third-party rights for 86 luxury cars and SUVs purchased from the company's funds.
The court sought the presence of CMD Anil Sharma and two directors Shiv Priya and Ajay Kumar on November 19.
The Amrapali Group has deliberately not complied with its earlier order and committed a "serious fraud" by diverting home-buyers' money from one company to other, said a bench of Justices Arun Mishra and UU Lalit.
The bench ordered that attachment of the group's state-of-the-art, multi-speciality, 100-bed hospital situated at Greater Noida for which funds from Ultra Home Construction Pvt Ltd were utilised.
The bank accounts of GauriSuta Infrastructures Pvt Ltd, its director Sunil Kumar and its assets after forensic auditors disclosed that Amrapali transferred home-buyers' money from one firm to sister companies using it as conduit, were also attached by the bench.
The report of forensic auditors said that Amrapali Infrastructure Pvt Ltd was the main company and around Rs 2,000 crore were transferred from it to other sister companies.
The court also pulled up the Group for filling 3000-4000-page affidavit with no requisite information and warned that directors may be sent behind bars for not disclosing the details sought by the court.
"We are giving one last opportunity to explain everything to the concerned directors and the Amrapali Group and comply with the orders of the court. It should also be explained as why contempt action should not be initiated against them," the bench said.
The bench posted the matter for further hearing on November 20.
