Thu, Jul 07, 2011 |CNBC-TV18
Perdaman Chemicals has got a temporary restraint against Lanco Infra against mortgaging Griffin Coal in the future. Andreas Walewski, Director says that the matter will be settled in a hearing on Wednesday.
“We didn’t take the decision lightly when we decided to go down the court route. We had no other option. We don’t intend to interfere in Lanco’s operations”, he tells CNBC-TV18.
Perdaman moves court against Lanco mortgage of Griffin Coal
He further added that Perdaman had not heard from Lanco about the restraint yet.
Griffin has given an undertaking to the court that it will not enter into any charge, pledge or security with regard to the Griffin coal asset. Perdaman is concerned with Griffin honouring the coal supply agreement and complying with its obligations under that agreement.
Below is a verbatim transcript of his interview with CNBC-TV18's Udayan Mukherjee and Mitali Mukherjee. Also watch the accompanying video.
Q: Why are you seeking this restraint on mortgaging of Griffin Coal?
A: There are number of reasons for seeking this restraint. In fact we have received that restraint for the time being. Griffin has given an undertaking to the court that it will not enter into any charge, pledge or security with regard to the Griffin coal asset and this matter will be heard again coming Wednesday.
There are several reasons; one, we want to establish whether there is any breach of coal supply agreement with us. We also want to establish to what extent there is a breach with regard to state agreement under which Griffin has a right to mine the coal because the coal assets are the state assets and Griffin only have a right to mine under the agreement. Thirdly, we obviously want to protect our position if we were to get a judgement of our damages, then it is important to protect Griffin’s assets so that they can pay any damages, if and when damages are payable.
Our application is not just for the injunction, but also for the discovery of certain key documents which we recently became aware of. Recently, Griffin registered a so-called negative pledge deed which may have an effect on both our coal supply agreement and the state agreement.
Q: At this point, do you have a response from Lanco Infrastructure and are you also seeking to put a halt on supply of coal to Lanco’s India facility, something that it has been doing?
A: No, we have not heard from Lanco Infratech. Also at the moment there is no supply of coal to Lanco as far as I am aware because the infrastructure isn’t in play. At the moment, it will take years for Griffin to put in place infrastructure and it requires environmental approvals. But in any event we don’t intent to interfere in Griffin’s operations. We are concerned about Griffin honouring the coal supply agreement and complying with its obligations under that agreement.
Q: I believe multiple meetings were held till that notice on 6th June. Is it still an option to look for some kind of out of court settlement for your and for Lanco, are you quite sure now that you want to go this down to litigation route?
A: We met with Lanco several times, Griffin and Lanco’s representatives including Lanco’s Chairman Mr. Rao during May and we made every attempt to come to a compromise solution. But Lanco was adamant and as I said previously we didn’t take the decision lightly when we decided to go down the court route. We have no other option. It is up to Griffin and Lanco to do something about this.
Q: Can you talk about this negative pledge deed that you just spoke about because that seems to be a new thing which has cropped up in this whole litigation. What is it about and why has it made you more cautious?
A: We only became aware of it at the end of June. It is a document that was registered with the Australian securities and investment commission and it has the effect that it prevents Griffin from giving any charge or security to anyone else and that also may have other consequences, we forget to the ultimate control of the coal assets. But you cannot tell until you see actually the document and so far Griffin has refused to give us a copy of the document. So that’s why we have now applied to the court to have a discovery of the document.
Perdaman Chemicals has got a temporary restraint against Lanco Infra against mortgaging Griffin Coal in the future. Andreas Walewski, Director says that the matter will be settled in a hearing on Wednesday.
“We didn’t take the decision lightly when we decided to go down the court route. We had no other option. We don’t intend to interfere in Lanco’s operations”, he tells CNBC-TV18.
Perdaman moves court against Lanco mortgage of Griffin Coal
He further added that Perdaman had not heard from Lanco about the restraint yet.
Griffin has given an undertaking to the court that it will not enter into any charge, pledge or security with regard to the Griffin coal asset. Perdaman is concerned with Griffin honouring the coal supply agreement and complying with its obligations under that agreement.
Below is a verbatim transcript of his interview with CNBC-TV18's Udayan Mukherjee and Mitali Mukherjee. Also watch the accompanying video.
Q: Why are you seeking this restraint on mortgaging of Griffin Coal?
A: There are number of reasons for seeking this restraint. In fact we have received that restraint for the time being. Griffin has given an undertaking to the court that it will not enter into any charge, pledge or security with regard to the Griffin coal asset and this matter will be heard again coming Wednesday.
There are several reasons; one, we want to establish whether there is any breach of coal supply agreement with us. We also want to establish to what extent there is a breach with regard to state agreement under which Griffin has a right to mine the coal because the coal assets are the state assets and Griffin only have a right to mine under the agreement. Thirdly, we obviously want to protect our position if we were to get a judgement of our damages, then it is important to protect Griffin’s assets so that they can pay any damages, if and when damages are payable.
Our application is not just for the injunction, but also for the discovery of certain key documents which we recently became aware of. Recently, Griffin registered a so-called negative pledge deed which may have an effect on both our coal supply agreement and the state agreement.
Q: At this point, do you have a response from Lanco Infrastructure and are you also seeking to put a halt on supply of coal to Lanco’s India facility, something that it has been doing?
A: No, we have not heard from Lanco Infratech. Also at the moment there is no supply of coal to Lanco as far as I am aware because the infrastructure isn’t in play. At the moment, it will take years for Griffin to put in place infrastructure and it requires environmental approvals. But in any event we don’t intent to interfere in Griffin’s operations. We are concerned about Griffin honouring the coal supply agreement and complying with its obligations under that agreement.
Q: I believe multiple meetings were held till that notice on 6th June. Is it still an option to look for some kind of out of court settlement for your and for Lanco, are you quite sure now that you want to go this down to litigation route?
A: We met with Lanco several times, Griffin and Lanco’s representatives including Lanco’s Chairman Mr. Rao during May and we made every attempt to come to a compromise solution. But Lanco was adamant and as I said previously we didn’t take the decision lightly when we decided to go down the court route. We have no other option. It is up to Griffin and Lanco to do something about this.
Q: Can you talk about this negative pledge deed that you just spoke about because that seems to be a new thing which has cropped up in this whole litigation. What is it about and why has it made you more cautious?
A: We only became aware of it at the end of June. It is a document that was registered with the Australian securities and investment commission and it has the effect that it prevents Griffin from giving any charge or security to anyone else and that also may have other consequences, we forget to the ultimate control of the coal assets. But you cannot tell until you see actually the document and so far Griffin has refused to give us a copy of the document. So that’s why we have now applied to the court to have a discovery of the document.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment