U.S. court places Satyam under fresh scanner

The firm had fraudulently induced a company, Venture Global Engineering, into a partnership

September 18, 2013 01:35 am | Updated December 04, 2021 11:07 pm IST - NEW YORK:

Nearly five years after India’s biggest corporate scam broke out at erstwhile Satyam Computer, a U.S. court has ordered fresh proceedings into charges that the firm had fraudulently induced a company, Venture Global Engineering (VGE), into a partnership.

Satyam, whose founder and then Chairman B. Ramalinga Raju, had admitted in January, 2009, a long-running fraud at the company, was later acquired by Tech Mahindra, and its entire business was integrated with the new owner earlier this year.

The latest ruling by a U.S. Appeals Court follows an earlier direction issued by a Districts Court of Michigan, which had dismissed claims made by VGE against Satyam with regard to a joint venture.

In its order dated September 13, the Appeals Court has reversed the judgment of the district court, and has ordered further proceedings into the matter.

In its appeal, VGE and the Larry J Winget Living Trust alleged that Satyam Computer Services ‘induced’ them to form a joint venture by “misrepresenting its financial stability and general suitability as a business partner.”

Satyam had argued that VGE should have brought its claims during an arbitration proceeding in 2005. The arbitrator had ruled that all of VGE’s ownership interest in the 50:50 joint venture — Satyam Venture Engineering Services (SVES) — be transferred to Satyam. VGE had complied with the order at that time.

After Mr. Raju confessed to a fraud in a letter to investors in 2009, VGE in December, 2010, filed an ‘instant action’ case, alleging that Satyam was engaged in a massive fraud even before the joint venture started. “We hold that because plaintiffs’ (VGE and the Trust) complaint adequately alleges that Satyam wrongfully concealed the factual predicate to plaintiffs’ claims, the defence of claim preclusion does not apply.

“Thus, the district court erred in granting defendants’ (Satyam) motion to dismiss. We, therefore, reverse the judgment of the district court, and remand for further proceedings,” the U.S. States Court of Appeals for Sixth Circuit ruled.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.