Category Archives: Activities

Our current activities concentrate on the case of Dewan Housing Finance Corporation Limited (DHFL), India. While exploring and investigating this particular case, we have found that India’s crony ruling party, gangsters, banksters as well as religious gurus and institutions are involved in the same. Therefore, to break such collusion, we have decided to deploy an “all out attack” on the existing paradigm of neoliberal market economy as well as market fundamentalism. ***DISCLAIMER: We have collected all the data from available sources on the internet as given on the official portals of media houses, websites and institutions and organizations. We are not first-hand reporters and hence, we are not liable for any inadvertent error or value-loaded statements made on those portals. All propositions have to be viewed as descriptive assertions on the given point of concern.***

The DHFL Case and the Contradictory Verdicts of the NCLAT

The article examines the contradictory verdicts from the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) regarding the DHFL case, highlighting four judgments issued in January and February 2022. It questions whether these inconsistencies arose from political pressure, inadequate judicial reasoning, or flaws in the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). The piece argues that the NCLAT favors non-convertible debenture (NCD) holders over fixed deposit (FD) holders, calling for a reassessment of the IBC to ensure equitable treatment for all creditors.

Beyond Pretensions: Narendra Modi and Ajay Piramal

The piece offers a trenchant critique of the symbiotic relationship between Narendra Modi’s BJP-led government and Ajay Piramal, framing it as emblematic of how politico-economic power is consolidated in contemporary India by means of moral-symbolic pretension and regulatory capture. The authors open with two speeches by Modi — one on the Congress manifesto, the other on the Ambani-Adani “scandal” — which they characterise as emblematic of his “habitual … web of pseudology” and the anxieties facing his regime. They then turn to Piramal, noting his declared allegiance to Gaudiya Vaishnava spirituality (via his association with ISKCON) and yet contrasting that with the multiple controversies surrounding him: alleged environmental violations (e.g., Digwal), insider trading reliefs, his acquisition of Dewan Housing Finance Corporation Limited (DHFL) via the insolvency regime, substantial electoral-bond donations to the BJP, and his positioning as a “friendly oligarch”. The article thus argues that Piramal’s spiritual-philanthropic branding and Modi’s populist entrepreneurial discourse function together to legitimise a regime of “more equal than others” capitalism in which dissent is sidelined, regulatory checks are bypassed, and unscrutinised mass suffering persists (illustrated through farmers, Manipuri communities and FD-holders). The tone is sharply condemnatory: Piramal is depicted as a “pretentious monster” unwilling to “look in the mirror”; Modi and the BJP are argued to be on the cusp of losing power as their contradictions mount. In sum, the article frames this duo as a case-study in how political-economic power cloaks itself in spirituality, populism and development slogans to evade accountability and maintain elite rule.

Ajay Piramal in the Ring of Fire of Controversies

This article presents a critical survey of the many controversies encircling Ajay Piramal, framing him as a polarising business-magnate whose corporate manoeuvres are frequently contested and legally fraught. Against a backdrop of alleged insider-trading, environmental violations (notably in Digwal, Telangana), the contentious acquisition of Dewan Housing Finance Corporation Limited (DHFL) via the insolvency process, large electoral-bond donations to the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), and the use of defamation and contempt litigation against critics, the piece argues that Piramal’s business success is anchored in regulatory capture, political patronage, and legal privilege. It argues that, by deploying legal tactics such as “blanket stay orders,” leveraging judicial delays and restructuring strategies (mergers/demergers) and aligning with ruling party dynamics, Piramal navigates a “ring of fire” of regulatory, social‐ and investor-based controversies while avoiding significant accountability. The article highlights how the financial losses of depositors and NCD investors in the DHFL resolution process, the alleged environmental harms, and the suppression of dissent through legal intimidation (SLAPP-type suits) are symptomatic of a broader state–capital nexus in which ordinary stakeholders—and democratic accountability—are systematically disadvantaged. It emphasises that although many of these controversies remain sub-judice, the weight of circumstantial evidence suggests a pattern of elite protection, structural impunity and capture of institutional mechanisms.