The Hindu : National : Arguments in Lodha-Birla row inconclusive

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Friday, Sep 09, 2005

National

National

Arguments in Lodha-Birla row inconclusive

Legal Correspondent

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Thursday adjourned to next week further hearing of a special leave petition against a Calcutta High Court order declining to stay the trial against R.S. Lodha and others for allegedly forging the will of the late Priyamvada Birla. A Bench of Justice B.P. Singh and Justice S.H. Kapadia heard arguments on Wednesday and Thursday from senior counsel Harish Salve appearing for one of the accused in the case, S.N. Prasad. Mr. Salve argued that the High Court had erroneously rejected the revision petitions in the case challenging the proceedings before the trial court. Rajinder Pansari, an associate of the Birlas, had filed a criminal case in a Kolkata court against Mr. Lodha, V. Gaurishankar, Mr. S.N. Prasad and S.K. Daga, accusing them of having committed a fraud by drafting Priyamvada Birla's will in Mr. Lodha's favour.

Revision plea rejected

Mr. Prasad filed a revision petition in the High Court to quash the criminal proceedings but this was rejected. Both Mr. Prasad and advocate Mr. Gaurishankar filed special leave petitions in the apex court seeking to quash the High Court order and stay of all further proceedings pending before the trial court. Mr. Salve contended that no criminal case had been made out against the four accused because the probate proceedings were still pending. He said the criminal complaint was filed under section 406 of the Indian Penal Code — misuse of authority as administrator of property, abuse of position and grabbing property. Mr. Salve denied the allegation that Mr. Lodha, who was auditor of the Birla group, was entrusted with the property vested in the form of five public trusts. He argued that the criminal complaint was carefully drafted and it contained selectively produced documents and these documents did not make out a case. Intervening, senior advocate Ram Jethmalani, appearing for the Birla Group, said that the Lodha camp was evading the question put forth by the Bench as to what was the Deed by which Priyamvada Birla had revoked the Will. Mr. Salve replied that he would answer that question.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

National