6 months ago
1
The Supreme Court connected Monday (November 17, 2025) allowed Sahara Group to respond to a practice made by amicus curiae, elder advocator Shekhar Naphade, that helium has received “at slightest 34 claims” to assorted properties which the institution wants to merchantability to Adani Properties Pvt. Ltd.
Appearing earlier a Bench of Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai, Justice Surya Kant and M.M. Sundresh, Mr. Naphade said Sahara India Commercial Corporation Ltd. (SICCL) did not disclose immoderate of these 34 claims to the Supreme Court erstwhile it had applied for support to merchantability a full of 88 properties, including Amby Valley successful Maharashtra and Shahara Saher successful Lucknow, to Adani Properties.
Mr. Naphade said the Securities Exchange Board of India (SEBI) should issued announcement successful the newspapers, inviting objections to the merchantability of each 88 properties.
Senior advocator Kapil Sibal and advocator Gautam Awasthi, appearing for Sahara, said the tribunal indispensable springiness the institution clip to respond to the amicus curiae.
The Court gave Sahara and the authorities 4 weeks to respond to the petition. The Court joined the Ministry of Cooperation successful the lawsuit arsenic Sahara was progressive successful galore cooperative societies.
SICCL had, successful an application, urged the Court for permission “to outright merchantability assorted properties belonging to the Sahara Group to Adani Properties Private Limited for the information and connected the presumption and conditions arsenic acceptable retired successful the word expanse dated September 6, 2025”.
SICCL said it and Sahara Group had large trouble been capable to liquidate definite of their movable and immovable assets. The proceeds were deposited into the SEBI – Sahara Refund Account.
“Out of a full main magnitude of ₹24,030 crore, the Sahara Group, by mode of sale/liquidation of their movable and immovable assets person realised an magnitude of astir ₹16,000 crore and deposited the aforesaid successful the SEBI – Sahara Refund Account,” the exertion said.
SICCL has argued it would “not beryllium retired of spot to notation that, arsenic tin beryllium seen from the erstwhile orders passed by the Supreme Court that though the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) had tried connected aggregate occasions to sell/liquidate the assets of the Sahara Group (including done engaging reputed property brokerage companies and consultants), it was yet incapable to liquidate immoderate assets of the Sahara Group. The entirety of the funds deposited successful the SEBI – Sahara Refund Account person been deposited done the sole efforts of and with large trouble by SICCL and the Sahara Group”.
The SICCL said the determination to merchantability was taken successful the involvement of stakeholders, including investors, successful bid to fulfill their claims. It said large efforts were made to liquidate moveable and immovable assets successful bid to deposit the proceeds into the SEBI-Sahara Refund Account.
Mr. Awasthi said the projected transaction was a breakthrough, not lone successful unlocking important worth from the Sahara Group’s cardinal immovable assets, but besides ensuring compliance with the fiscal obligations.
Noting that Sahara mislaid its sole decision-maker with the demise of Subrata Roy successful November 2023, SICCL said the “family members tendency to safeguard the involvement of the investors”.
