)
Accusing Mirach Capital of “cheating and forgery” in the failed $2.05-billion loan arrangement, Sahara on Thursday said it has initiated legal action against the US-based firm and it is now working on a new deal to raise funds to secure bail for its chief Subrata Roy.
The crisis-hit group alleged that Mirach and its chief executive Saransh Sharma’s “criminal conduct and lack of financial capabilities to honour such huge commitments led to the breaking down of its deal with Sahara.”
“Sahara is now taking legal actions, both of civil and criminal nature, against such gross criminal conduct of MCG (Mirach Capital Group) and their officers, both in India as well as in the US,” a Sahara spokesperson said.
He further said an FIR has already been filed in this regard, while adding that the group is now “working on another deal and Sahara will comply the order (of the Supreme Court) very soon.” There was no immediate reply to queries mailed to Mirach.
Mirach had on Wednesday formally called off its $2.05 billion loan financing for Saharas and said it has returned the entire due diligence fees of $2.625 million to them.
It also accused Sahara of being an “unwilling seller” for the three overseas properties — The Plaza and Dream Downtown in New York and the Grosvenor House in London.
With its financing arrangement, which involved transfer of loans taken by Saharas from Bank of China for three these hotels to a clutch of investors, Mirach had emerged as a white-knight in Sahara’s efforts to secure release of its jailed chief Subrata Roy till its syndicate loan offer got embroiled in an alleged “forged letter” controversy.
Sahara and Mirach were asked to finalise their deal by February 20 to help arrange funds for securing release of Roy and his two colleagues, who have been lodged in Tihar Jail for almost a year now.
While calling off the loan deal, Mirach yesterday said it was still willing to arrange a full buyout of Sahara's three overseas hotels for a similar amount of USD 2.05 billion.
The loan deal fell apart after Bank of America disclosed that it was not involved in the deal as was being claimed.
