 Online edition of India's National Newspaper Friday, Oct 17, 2008 ePaper | Mobile/PDA Version |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Tamil Nadu |
|
News:
ePaper |
Front Page |
National |
Tamil Nadu |
Andhra Pradesh |
Karnataka |
Kerala |
New Delhi |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Engagements |
Advts: Retail Plus | Classifieds | Jobs | Obituary |
Tamil Nadu
CHENNAI: The Madras High Court on Tuesday said that there was no merit, prima facie, in any of the grounds on which a listed company engaged in the manufacture and export of sugar, assailed a deal with a bank in pursuance of ISDA (International Swaps and Derivatives Association) Master Agreement. The fact that the deal had exposed the company to the possibility of a huge financial loss was no ground to declare the contract as null and void, illegal or opposed to public policy, Justice V.Ramasubramanian said. In fact, the deal itself did not bring any misfortune to the company. It was the fate of the US Dollar, which had brought the company to the precipice. Derivatives are “financial instruments whose values depended on the value of other underlying financial instruments.” Since the rate of exchange of foreign currencies kept fluctuating, Rajshree Sugars and Chemicals Ltd, Coimbatore, the exporter, decided to hedge the risk against such fluctuations. In May 2004, it entered into an ISDA Master Agreement with UTI Bank, which later became AXIS Bank. Following the agreement, at least 10 deals were struck between the plaintiff and the bank. Nine deals matured without any dispute. But the company came to court with regard to the 10th deal which was a USD-CHF (US Dollars-Swiss Franc) Option Structure entered into on June 22 last year. Passing orders on applications filed by the company and the bank, Justice Ramasubramanian said the company which had the benefit of a push up the ladder in nine out of 10 deals could not duck when it came to a pull down the ladder in the remaining one deal. The Judge said that the company was not entitled to any injunction restraining the bank from enforcing the deal. Hence, he dismissed the applications for injunction. The injunction earlier granted was vacated. The court held that the suit was maintainable.
Printer friendly
page
News:
ePaper |
Front Page |
National |
Tamil Nadu |
Andhra Pradesh |
Karnataka |
Kerala |
New Delhi |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Engagements |
|
|
|
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription Group Sites: The Hindu | The Hindu ePaper | Business Line | Business Line ePaper | Sportstar | Frontline | Publications | eBooks | Images | Ergo | Home |
Copyright © 2008, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu
|