According to informed sources, the Indian government is on the verge of accepting a revised offer from Fairfax Financial Holdings Ltd. regarding IDBI Bank Ltd. This offer from the Canadian company is expected to be slightly increased before receiving final approvals from regulators and the Cabinet.
Sources reported that Fairfax, whose initial valuation of IDBI Bank was rejected because it was below the so-called government reserve price, may increase its bid per share by several rupees. Details of the discussions remain confidential, and sources declined to disclose specific information.
Final approvals from the Indian Cabinet and the Reserve Bank of India are necessary to move the deal forward. Reuters previously reported that Fairfax Financial raised capital in the country ahead of a potential stake purchase in IDBI.
The government, led by Narendra Modi, has been unable to sell this Mumbai-based bank for several years, and it has not disclosed a minimum reserve price. A successful deal would mark the largest divestment of a controlling stake in a domestic bank by the state in recent years.
Fairfax Financial, founded by Indo-Canadian billionaire Prem Watsa, was the main contender for the stake purchase. Bloomberg had also previously reported that Fairfax faced competition from Emirates NBD PJSC.
The Delhi High Court on Monday demanded a response from the Central Government regarding applications submitted by members and employees of the Delhi Gymkhana Club. These applications challenge a notice requiring explanations that proposed their eviction from the 27.3 acre club premises on Safdarjung Road.
Judge Avnish Dhingan issued a notification to the central government concerning these applications, which sought to stay the eviction notice. The court also directed General Counsel Tushar Mehta to ensure the postponement of the property officer hearing scheduled for July 7 until the matter is reconsidered by the High Court on July 28.
SG Mehta, representing the Centre, informed the court that the government would provide its response to the filed applications. He noted, referencing the proceedings before the property officer, that they might request a delay within that process.
Nevertheless, Judge Dhingan insisted that the counsel guarantee that the hearing would not take place before the High Court reviews the matter. The judge observed: 'Mr. Mehta, we leave this to the already established date (in the main case). Just ensure that the hearing (of the property officer) is postponed after this date.'
The applications were filed by club member Vijay Hurana and the Welfare Association of Employees of Delhi Gymkhana Club Ltd as part of an ongoing challenge to the Land Use and Development Authority's decision from May 22.
The Land Use and Development Authority (L&DO) terminated the club's perpetual lease and demanded the handover of the land by June 5, citing the need to strengthen and secure defense infrastructure. On June 29, L&DO, operating under the aegis of the Union Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs, issued a notice requiring explanations, asking the club to explain why eviction procedures under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971, should not commence.
This notice was issued by Property Officer Bipin Kumar Singh, who directed the club and all other residents of the premises to submit their responses by July 7 and appear for a personal hearing at 2:30 PM the same day.
The latest development occurred after the Centre previously assured the Delhi High Court on May 26 that it would not forcibly acquire the property by June 5. At that time, the government claimed the land was necessary for 'strengthening and securing defense infrastructure.' Mehta had then told the court that the government would only take possession according to established legal procedure.
