Mukesh Ambani, the richest Asian, adds this much wealth while 128 tycoons lose $137 billion in 2018

Agencies
December 24, 2018

Dec 24: The world’s fastest growing source of mega-wealth hit a speed bump this year. The 128 people in Asia with enough money to crack the 500-member Bloomberg Billionaires Index lost a combined $137 billion in 2018, the first time wealth in the region has dropped since the ranking started in 2012.

Global trade tensions and concerns that stock valuations are too frothy hammered some of the area’s biggest fortunes. China’s tech sector was hit particularly hard, while India and South Korea weren’t spared. The declines occurred even as banks and money managers aggressively stepped up efforts to cater to Asia’s richest. Asian equities retreated again on Friday, with benchmarks slipping in Japan, China and Australia.

“Difficult stock market conditions this year and the uncertainty of the trade tensions likely have been a challenge to many businesses,” said Philip Wyatt, a Hong Kong-based economist for UBS Group AG, who doesn’t see the downdraft continuing through 2019 or significantly reducing the ranks of billionaires. Conditions are actually ripe for the region to create more of the mega rich as new technologies attract private capital and government support, he said.

For now, though, fear in the market is trampling fortunes. More than two-thirds of the 40 Chinese on the Bloomberg ranking saw their wealth dwindle. Wanda Group’s Wang Jianlin, whose property conglomerate is selling assets to cut debt, lost $10.8 billion, the most of anyone in Asia. JD.com founder Richard Liu, who was arrested in the U.S. in August for less than 24 hours on suspicion of rape before being released, took the heaviest losses in percentage terms, with his wealth cut almost in half to $4.8 billion. Liu won’t be charged, authorities in Minneapolis said Friday.

India’s 23 richest people, meanwhile, saw $21 billion vanish. Lakshmi Mittal, who controls the world’s largest steelmaker, led the way, losing $5.6 billion, or 29 percent of his net worth, followed by Dilip Shanghvi, the founder of Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, the world’s fourth-largest generic drugmaker, whose wealth declined $4.6 billion.

South Korea’s tycoons didn’t escape the carnage either. The market rout lopped $17.2 billion from the fortunes of the country’s seven richest people. The father and son who control Samsung Electronics, Lee Kun-Hee and son Jay Y Lee, account for more than a third of that decline. In Hong Kong, titans of real estate took a big hit. Li Ka-shing, who retired as chairman of CK Hutchison and CK Asset in March, lost $6 billion in 2018, while Lee Shau Kee, the city’s second-richest person, ends the year about $3.3 billion poorer. There were still plenty of winners to emerge from the wreckage of 2018.

Lei Jun, the chairman of Chinese smartphone maker Xiaomi Corp., added $8.7 billion, with a July initial public offering catapulting him into the Top 100 of the Bloomberg index after he started the year outside the ranking. The IPO also turned three of his co-founders into billionaires. Japan’s richest person, Tadashi Yanai, added $6.3 billion to his fortune as shares of Fast Retailing Co., the world’s largest apparel retailer, surged 30 percent. India’s Mukesh Ambani added $4 billion to his fortune and eclipsed Alibaba Group Holding Ltd.’s Jack Ma as Asia’s richest person, thanks in part to the performance of Reliance Industries Ltd. Among the winners, the Bloomberg Billionaires Index added new members in technology, consumer, biotech and pharmaceuticals.

E-commerce platform Pinduoduo Inc.’s Colin Huang was the second-largest winner in the region, adding $6.6 billion to his net worth. China’s third largest online retailer was targeted by short seller Blue Orca Capital in November for overstating financials, though its shares traded higher that week as the company denied the accusation and posted strong growth in sales. While most of the newcomers to Asia’s ranks of billionaires are from China, there are five from Korea and four from Japan. Two new billionaires were identified in Southeast Asia. The household “must-have” fish sauce condiment saw Nguyen Dang Quang, chairman of Vietnam’s consumer giant Masan Group, join the ultra-rich club. Indonesian real estate mogul Donald Sihombing, who works 20 hours a day, also joined the list. At least six Asian billionaires died, leaving behind a total of $29 billion.

Walter Kwok, the former chairman of Hong Kong’s biggest real estate developer Sun Hung Kai Properties Ltd. who was worth $9.1 billion, died in October at the age of 68. His two sons inherited a $3 billion stake from the company, according to regulatory filings. Vichai Srivaddhanaprabha, the founder of Thailand’s duty-free giant King Power Group, was killed in a helicopter crash in October. He owned English Premier League team Leicester City.

Comments

shaji
 - 
Wednesday, 26 Dec 2018

Ambani, Adani etc are earning billions mainly due to support from the Govt.    These looters are free to do any cheating / malpractice etc etc.   they are looting money from common indian and increasing their wealth which they will take with them at the time of death.  

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
March 1,2020

Kolkata, Mar 1: The Calcutta High Court has ruled that it is not mandatory for foreigners to produce a valid passport and its particulars for processing of application for grant of Indian citizenship if he is able to satisfy the appropriate authorities the reasons for non-availability of the document.

Justice Sabysachi Bhattacharya passed the order while disposing off a petition by granting the petitioner liberty to file an application before the authority "as contemplated in Rule 11 of the Citizenship Rules 2009, upon furnishing explanation as to the non-availability of the passport".

Bismillah Khan had filed the petition saying he was being denied the citizenship of India because of his inability to file an application under Section 5 (1) (c) of the Citizenship Act, 1955, apparently due to the mandatory requirement of furnishing a copy of the passport for such application.

The petitioner's counsel submitted that Khan was a Pakhtoon citizen and due to political turmoil in the said state, which subsequently merged partially into Afghanistan and partially into Pakistan, he, as a five-year old, had to migrate to India with his father in 1973.

Under such circumstances, the petitioner could not have any opportunity of having a valid passport, since they were refugees under distress, the counsel said.

The petitioner had previously approached a coordinate Bench of the court, wherein a single judge, passed an order on July 25, 2018, directing him to comply with the formalities required, as communicated by the secretary to the Government of India to the Secretary to the Government of West Bengal (Home), vide a letter dated December 7, 2017.

The court had then also given liberty to the petitioner to apply afresh before the appropriate authority under Section 5(1)(c) of the 1955 Act, having complied with all the formalities.

The petitioner then moved Bhattacharya's court submitting that a complete application as directed by the Coordinate Bench cannot be possibly filed by his client due to the mandatory requirement of uploading a copy of his passport, which the petitioner does not have due to reasons beyond his control.

The counsel said Khan is married to an Indian citizen, has a daughter and living in India for close to half a century.

The counsel for the union of India submitted that in view of no application having been filed by the petitioner, there is no scope of granting such proposed application at the present juncture for the Union.

The counsel argued that it is mandatory to file an application in Form III for the application of the petitioner under Section 5(1)(c) of the Act to be considered at all.

In view of the petitioner not complying with the mandatory requirement of submitting a copy of his passport, the state government cannot, under the law, forward such application to the union government.

After hearing all sides, Justice Bhattacharya said although the rule "contemplates that an application shall not be entertained unless the application is made in Form III, such provision ipso facto does not make the availability of a passport a mandatory requirement".

"..the Form given with the Rules or the Rules themselves cannot override the provision of the statute itself, under which the said Rules are framed, which does not stipulate such a mandate on the applicants for citizenship under Section 5 (1)(c) of the 1955 Act mandatorily to carry a passport".

The court said although such provision is included in the Form, which has to be complied with by the applicant, "it is nowhere indicated in such Form that all the relevant particulars, including the particulars regarding passport of the petitioner have to be furnished mandatorily, along with a copy of a valid foreign passport, even in the event the petitioner, for valid reasons, is not in a position to produce such passport".

Justice Bhattacharya ruled that under such circumstances, it cannot be held that the provision of producing a passport and its particulars is mandatory in nature and there has to be a relaxation in such requirement "in case the petitioner is able to satisfy the appropriate authorities the reasons for non- availability of such passport".

"Unless such a leeway is given to the applicants, genuine persons who otherwise have all the formal documents indicating that they have been residing in India for a long time and have married a resident of India would also be unable to apply for Indian Citizenship despite having lived their entire lives and contributed to the economy and diverse culture of this country."

He said such a scenario would be contradictory to the spirit of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

"In such view of the matter, the requirement of having a passport has to be read as optional in Form III of the Citizenship Rules, 2009 and the authorities are deemed to have the power to relax such 6 requirement in the event the applicant satisfied the authorities for genuine reasons why the applicant is not in a position to produce such passport," the February 24 order said.

The court ruled that despite the provision of making applications online, a provision has to be made for persons who do not have all the particulars of their passport, which is read as optional, to file applications manually, which are to be treated as valid applications under Rule 5 of the Citizenship Rules, 2009.

The court also ordered that alternatively the necessary software be amended so that the online applications can be presented with or without passports, in the latter case furnishing detailed reasons as to non-furnishing of passports.

"Sanctioning of such forms, however, will be conditional upon the satisfaction of the relevant authorities about the reasons for the applicant not being able to produce her/his passport," the order said.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
February 19,2020

New Delhi, Feb 19: Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal met Union Home Minister Amit Shah on Wednesday, their first meeting after the assembly polls in the national capital.

The meeting went on for over 20 minutes at Shah's residence. The meeting was earlier scheduled at the Home Ministry.

"Met Hon'ble Home Minister Sh Amit Shah ji. Had a very good and fruitful meeting. Discussed several issues related to Delhi. Both of us agreed that we will work together for development of Delhi," Kejriwal tweeted.

Shah had led the BJP offensive against Kejriwal in the Delhi Assembly polls in which AAP trounced the saffron party, bagging 62 of the 70 seats.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
July 21,2020

New Delhi, Jul 21: Prime Minister Narendra Modi and President Ram Nath Kovind on Tuesday condoled the demise of Madhya Pradesh Governor Lalji Tandon.

Tandon, 85, passed away at 5:35 am on Tuesday after a prolonged illness.

Taking to Twitter, Prime Minister Modi posted a picture with Madhya Pradesh Governor and wrote, "Shri Lalji Tandon will be remembered for his untiring efforts to serve society. He played a key role in strengthening the BJP in Uttar Pradesh. He made a mark as an effective administrator, always giving importance of public welfare. Anguished by his passing away."
"Shri Lalji Tandon was well-versed with constitutional matters. He enjoyed a long and close association with beloved Atal Ji. In this hour of grief, my condolences to the family and well-wishers of Shri Tandon. Om Shanti," he added.

President Kovind expressed condolences saying that we have lost a legendary leader today.

"In the passing away of Madhya Pradesh Governor Shri Lal Ji Tandon, we have lost a legendary leader who combined cultural sophistication of Lucknow and acumen of a national stalwart. I deeply mourn his death. My heartfelt condolences to his family and friends," he tweeted.

His last rites will be performed at Gulala Ghat in Lucknow at 4:30 pm today.

Tandon was admitted to a hospital after complaining of breathing problems, difficulty in urination and fever. He has been undergoing treatment since June 11. 

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.