Karnataka BJP will soon witness large scale defection, predicts Siddaramaiah

Bengaluru, May 9: The Karnataka government may not extend the daily working hours from 8 to 12, with Labour Minister A Shivaram Hebbar saying on Saturday that the move would neither benefit the industries nor workers.

Hebbar said that the proposal has not been discussed and it may come for final deliberations next week. He also noted that some States have already extended the working hours. More than extending working hours, there should be employment to be given. If there are no jobs what can be done by extending working hours? If it is done (working hours extended to 12 hours), it would neither benefit workers nor industries. Let's see what happens, he said.

Asked if the government was in favour of the extension, he said, "I don't think it will be ready for the (12 hour) proposal." Meanwhile, the Minister also said that their top priority now was to see that all MSMEs start operating again, salaries are paid to employees and there are no job losses for any reason. If industries don't reopen, how can workers get their employment? We should think in parallel, Hebbar said adding, the government was keeping the interests of both MSMEs and workers in mind.

He urged the Centre to offer a relief package to the MSME sector, saying it is facing very difficult times due to the adverse impact of the COVID-19-induced lockdown, and also noting its role in generating large-scale employment and feeding large industries.

The BJP-led government has done whatever within its limitations to help the MSMEs, he said. Earlier this week, the Chief Minister B S Yediyurappa announced that the monthly fixed charges of electricity bills of MSMEs would be waived for two months. MSMEs have suffered huge production losses due to the lockdown. It takes some time for them to revive, Yediyurappa had said. The Chief Minister had also said payment of fixed charges in the electricity bills of the large industries will be deferred without penalty and interest for a period of two months.

Bengaluru, Jun 20: A petition has been filed in Karnataka High Court to transfer Amulya Leona case to the National Investigation Agency (NIA). She raised pro-Pakistan slogans at an anti-CAA rally on February 20 at Freedom Park.

The petition, filed by advocate Vishal Raghu, blamed the probe team for not filing chargesheet on time and suggested the state government to approach the higher court against bail granted to Amulya Leona.

On June 11, she was granted conditional bail by the Bengaluru civil court.

She was charged with sedition for her actions in the presence of All India Majlis-e-Ittehad-ul-Muslimeen chief Asaduddin Owaisi.

The court granted bail after hearing the bail application. Amulya's advocate on behalf of the petitioner said, "the petitioner is just a 19-year-old lady and she is studying in a private college in the Bengaluru. She shouted 'Pakistan Zindabad' but she never mentioned Pakistan as her country."

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.