• PAGE ONE
• INDEX
• HOME

BIFR peeved with Pan Asia promoters

Richa Mishra

NEW DELHI, March 7

THE Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (BIFR) has directed Pan Asia Industries Ltd (PAIL) to furnish the information required by IDBI at the earliest and has also expressed displeasure at the lack of seriousness exhibited by the company pr omoters for its revival.

The Board also made it clear that such a state of affairs shall not be allowed to continue any further. The Bench directed the company and its promoters to furnish forthwith all the information required by Rajasthan Consultancy Organisation Ltd (Rajcon) and IDBI, the operating agency (OA), for conducting techno-economic viability (TEV) study.

On the receipt of the TEV study report, IDBI is to examine the company's proposal and formulate a proper rehabilitation scheme with the means of finance fully tied-up, the Bench said. It has also been asked to ensure suitable provisions for the dues of M aharashtra Apex Corporation Ltd in the rehabilitation scheme.

In the event of a comprehensive rehabilitation scheme with the means of finance fully tied-up and duly agreed to by all concerned being received, the Bench will consider formulating and circulating a draft rehabilitation scheme (DRS) based thereon withou t holding any further hearing, the Board observed.

The Board also noted that in the event of such a scheme not being received, the Bench will order initiation of steps for change in management without holding any further hearing.

The Bench also directed the Bank of India (BoI) to furnish the complete details regarding the orders passed by the High Court. Further, the company has been directed not to lease out any of its plant and machinery without informing the OA and seeking the permission of the Bench.

The Bench noted that the case of PAIL had been before the Board since 1998, and during this period, the company had, by its action, demonstrated that it was lacking in sincerity in rehabilitation.

The company had submitted its rehabilitation proposal with considerable delay and had not extended the required cooperation to the consultants appointed by the OA for conducting the TEV study and valuation of assets.