Hyderabad Cricket Association knocks on HC doors over freezing of account, assets
HYDERABAD: In a surprising turn of events, Justice L Nageswara Rao, the administrator and former Supreme Court judge overseeing the administration of Hyderabad Cricket Association (HCA), has challenged a trial court’s order that froze accounts and assets of the cricket body including Uppal International Stadium. Justice Rao contends that the trial court’s decision was made without giving him an opportunity to present his case, prompting him to approach the Telangana High Court seeking quashing of the trial court order.
During a brief mention before a bench consisting of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice NV Shravan Kumar, the petitioner’s counsel, M Sarat Kumar, received assurances that the matter would be heard on Friday.
The legal dispute stems from an ongoing commercial dispute between Visaka Industries, formerly led by G Vivekananda and the HCA. Visaka Industries alleges that the HCA breached a development agreement, while the latter contends that Vivekananda sought unwarranted gains without fulfilling his obligations. The agreement had been terminated some time ago, and the matter is currently being adjudicated by a commercial court in Hyderabad.
A commercial court issued an ex parte order awarding Rs 40 crore to Visaka Industries. HCA’s efforts to have the arbitral award set aside proved futile. Subsequently, another trial court, acting on Vivekananda’s execution plea, issued the asset attachment orders.
V Ramchandar Goud, the legal counsel representing the HCA and its administrator, argues that the trial court orders run counter to the spirit of the Supreme Court’s ruling. The Supreme Court has appointed Justice L Nageswara Rao as the administrator and issued a blanket restraint order under Article 142, preventing any court in the country from making orders that interfere with Justice Rao’s efforts in rectifying the numerous issues plaguing HCA.
Goud also highlighted the timing of the developments, as the World Cup season is set to commence in October. All of the assets within the stadium, as well as the bank account, are currently frozen, effectively immobilizing the administrator. Goud argues that this situation amounts to unwarranted interference with the duties of the single-man committee cum administrator appointed by the apex court.