[ad_1]
Mohammed Mansoor Khan, promoter of I-Financial Advisory (IMA) group of firms and the prime accused within the IMA rip-off, has moved the Excessive Court docket of Karnataka questioning a particular court docket’s order of confirming attachment of one in all his flats for its sale.
A division bench comprising Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice S. Vishwajith Shetty, earlier than which the attraction got here up for listening to, ordered challenge of discover to the State authorities and the Competent Authority (CA) appointed for the IMA rip-off case underneath the Karnataka Safety of Curiosity of Depositors in Monetary Institutions (KPIFFE) Act, 2004.
An residence located on Bannerghatta Street Structure in Tilaknagar, Bengaluru, which was bought by Khan in 2014, was amongst a number of different immovable properties and the financial institution accounts, attachment of which was confirmed by the particular court docket arrange for KPIDFE circumstances in its order handed on March 7, 2022.
The particular court docket had additionally directed the CA to promote immovable properties for realisation of cash to pay again the depositors. Moreover, the particular court docket had additionally directed the CA to switch quantities standing in among the financial institution accounts and financial institution deposit account of IMA, attachments of which have been confirmed, to CA’s account to distribute the quantity to the depositors.
‘Not deposits’
It has been contended within the attraction, amongst different grounds, that the particular court docket had failed to understand the competition of the IMA and its promoter that investments made don’t fall inside the definition of “deposit” outlined underneath the KPIDFE Act.
The funding made by means of capital contribution within the corporations is particularly excluded from the definition of “deposit” underneath the KPIDFE Act as majority of entities which might be a part of the IMA group are restricted legal responsibility partnership corporations (LLPs) and all of the buyers had introduced in cash in to those corporations by means of ‘capital contribution’ and the stated quantity is ‘invested’ in varied sectors, it has been claimed within the attraction whereas contending that KPIDFE Act shouldn’t be relevant to the IMA group.
The federal government has not even made any try and know the connection between the buyers and the entity during which the funding has been made. Because the investments had been made in the direction of capital contribution the provisions of KPIDFE Act, don’t have any software, it has been contended within the attraction
Difficult the notifications issued by the State authorities attaching the properties, it has been contended within the attraction that property in Tilaknagar was bought by Khan out of his private earnings and the earnings accrued from his enterprise ventures in accordance with legislation, and the CA had failed to indicate that the property was bought bought from the “deposits” of most of the people.
[ad_2]
Source link
