Depression: 28-yr-old techie-turned SI from Karnataka ends life in Delhi

Davanagere, Jun 15: Karnataka Health Minister B Sriramulu was on Monday seen without face mask at an event in Davanagere amid COVID-19 crisis in the country.

The Minister was attending the wedding ceremony of son of former minister Parameshwar Naik at Hagaribommanahalli in Davanagere.

This is not the first time that Sriramulu has flouted the norms for preventing the spread of COVID-19. He took part in a procession in Chitradurga on June 2 and flouted social distancing norms. He was seen surrounded by several supporters while a big garland was being offered to him.

The state has reported 6,245 COVID-19 cases including 2,977 cured, 3,196 active cases and 72 deaths.

Mumbai, Feb 8: Anil Ambani, the brother of Asia’s richest man has pleaded poverty in his dispute with three Chinese banks seeking $680 million in defaulted loans.

“The value of my investments has collapsed,” Anil Ambani said, according to a court filing by the banks in a London lawsuit.

“The current value of my shareholdings is down to approximately $82.4m and my net worth is zero after taking into account my liabilities. In summary, I do not hold any meaningful assets which can be liquidated for the purposes of these proceedings.”

The lawsuit was filed by three state-controlled Chinese banks which argue that they provided a loan of $925 million to Ambani’s Reliance Communications Ltd. in 2012 with the condition that he personally guarantee the debt. The comments were disclosed on Friday as Ambani sought to avoid depositing hundreds of millions of dollars with the court ahead of a trial.

The embattled Indian tycoon says that while he agreed to give a non-binding “personal comfort letter,” he never gave a guarantee tied to his personal assets -- an “extraordinary potential personal liability.”

The 60-year-old is the brother of Mukesh Ambani, who’s worth $56.5 billion and is the wealthiest man in Asia. Anil, on the other hand, has seen his personal fortune dwindle over recent years, losing his billionaire status. His Reliance Communications filed for bankruptcy last year.

The banks asked Judge David Waksman to force Ambani to put up $656 million into the court’s account.

Representatives for Ambani’s Reliance Group said they couldn’t immediately comment. They said the group will issue a statement once the court issues the final order.

Ambani’s lawyer, Robert Howe, said the court shouldn’t order his client to make a payment he can’t make. The tycoon argues that an order requiring him to do so would hinder his ability to defend himself in the case, Howe said.

“There’s no evidence of some giant pot of gold that he can pull $1 million, let alone $10 million, let alone $100 million,” Howe said.

Bankim Thanki, an attorney representing Industrial & Commercial Bank of China Ltd., China Development Bank and the Export-Import Bank of China, said in a filing that Ambani’s statements are “plainly a yet further opportunistic attempt to evade his financial obligations to the lenders.”

Ambani was caught up in another legal wrangle last year when India’s Supreme Court threatened him with prison after Reliance Communications failed to pay Rs 5.5 billion ($77 million) to Ericsson AB’s Indian unit. The judges gave him a month to find the funds, and his brother, Mukesh, stepped in just in time to make the payment.

Anil said in a filing that he recognized that the judge would want to know if he could satisfy any order to put up funds from outside resources, including his family.

“I can confirm that I have made enquiries but I am unable to raise any finance from external sources,” he said. Judge Waksman had said in an earlier ruling that he believed Ambani’s defence would be shown to be “opportunistic and false.”

Ambani’s lawyer told the judge that as a result of the comments the tycoon’s relatives were unlikely to lend any funds.

There is a “very substantial risk they will never get it back,” Howe said.

Bengaluru, June 12: The Karnataka government has withdrawn its notification that allowed factories to extend working hours up to 10 hours a day and 60 hours a week, with immediate effect.

The extension of work hours was from eight hours a day and 48 hours a week. On May 22, the government had exempted all the factories registered under the Factories Act, from the provisions of Section 51 (weekly hours) and Section 54 (daily hours), till August 21 subject to certain conditions.

"Whereas, having examined the provisions further, the Government of Karnataka now intends to withdraw the said notification," the state government in a fresh notification dated June 11 said.

It said, "Therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 5 of Factories Act, 1948 (Act No. 63 of 1948), the Government of Karnataka hereby withdraws the Notification dated 22-05-2020 with immediate effect."

According to the Karnataka Employers' Association, a petition was filed in the High Cour challenging the May 22 notification as "illegal, arbitrary and in violation" of Section 5 of the Factories Act which permits exemption from any of the provisions of the Factories Act only in case of Public Emergencies'.

During the course of hearing on June 11 an observation was made by the High Court, that it may have to quash the notification unless the government clarifies as to what is the 'Public Emergency' involved to enhance the working hours by exempting some provisions of the Factories Act, it said.

The court further observed that the government should make a submission on June 12 in this behalf. However, the government withdrew the notification on June 11 itself. Recently states like Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh too had retracted after permitting extending work hours.