The loans taken by their companies were repaid as part of a one-time settlement approved by Piramal Capital & Housing Finance, which took over Dewan Housing Finance Corporation Ltd (DHFL), the special CBI court observed. According to the CBI’s case, companies of Balwa and Goenka had been involved in diverting loans that DHFL took from Yes Bank and that they had failed to settle the liabilities.
The court, in its order, said the investigating officer had not mentioned the settlement with Piramal Capital in a supplementary charge sheet filed with it. “He has not done it deliberately for reasons best known to him,” it observed.
The loan has now been settled and whether Yes Bank is at loss or not is between Yes Bank and Piramal Capital, the order said. The accused had not taken loans from Yes Bank directly, the court observed.
As per the CBI case, between 2009 and 2017, the accused builders had availed of multiple loans from Yes Bank for construction of residential and commercial projects in Mumbai. However, they did not deliver these properties to buyers.
Also, according to the CBI, loans of Rs 350 crore disbursed from 2013 to 2016 were diverted by making payments due on the group companies of Balwa’s DB Group. The loan was secured by land as well as current and future receivables of real estate projects, corporate guarantees, a 30% shareholding of DB Realty and the personal guarantee of the accused.
The accused were represented by advocate Vijay Aggarwal.
The court also dropped charges against stockbroker Sanjay Dangi for allegedly manipulating the share price of DHFL on the instance of one of the accused in the case, Sanjay Chhabariaa. According to the case the CBI filed in September 2018, Chhabariaa’s company allegedly diverted Rs 115 crore Mentor Capital Ltd, owned by Dangi.
The agency failed to collect any evidence to show that money received by Dangi’s company was through loans taken by Yes Bank by DHFL, the court said. It observed that Dangi’s firm received the loans prior to the date on when Yes Bank disbursed the loan to DHFL.
“There is no recital in the charge sheet, as to whether Sanjay Dangi was aware of the fact that the amount of the loan taken will be diverted in the account of his company or not,” the court said, holding that the charge levelled against Dangi has no basis.
