CELEBRATING MORE THAN YEARS
AWARDS & RECOGNITION
UPDATES
PRACTICE AREAS
PEOPLE
News and Articles
Indian Company Shares
What Should Overseas Investors Check Before Buying Shares in an Indian Private Limited Company?
Buying Indian Company Shares can give overseas investors access to one of the world’s major markets. However, purchasing shares in an Indian private limited company requires more than agreeing on a price. Investors need to assess the company’s financial position, ownership structure, legal obligations and compliance history. They must also confirm whether the proposed investment is permitted under India’s foreign investment rules. A thorough review before signing the share purchase agreement can reveal hidden liabilities, restrictions on ownership and risks which may affect the value of the investment. The following guide explains the key legal, financial and regulatory checks overseas investors should complete before acquiring shares in an Indian private limited company. 1. Confirm Whether Foreign Investment Is Permitted The first step is to establish whether the company’s business activities permit investment from a person resident outside India. Foreign direct investment is regulated by the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 (FEMA), the Foreign Exchange Management (Non Debt Instruments) Rules, 2019, and India’s foreign direct investment policy. Depending on the sector, foreign investment may be permitted under the automatic route or require prior government approval. Certain activities also have restrictions or conditions relating to foreign ownership. The applicable rules can depend on the company’s actual activities, the proposed ownership percentage and the investor’s circumstances. Investors should review the relevant sectoral cap, entry route and operating conditions before proceeding. They should also consider whether investment from the investor’s country of origin triggers additional approval requirements. Under India’s policy for investments from countries sharing a land border with India, certain investments require government approval. The latest policy and applicable amendments should be checked before signing a binding transaction document. A company’s existing foreign shareholders do not, by themselves, prove a proposed acquisition is permitted. 2. Verify the Company’s Legal Status and Ownership Before negotiating the final price, confirm the company’s identity, incorporation status and current ownership. Obtain its certificate of incorporation, memorandum and articles of association, corporate identification number, and available filings with the Ministry of Corporate Affairs. Review the company’s register of members, share certificates, latest annual returns and relevant allotment or transfer records. These documents help establish who legally holds the shares and whether the stated ownership matches the company’s statutory records. The review should also identify the company’s directors, authorised signatories, subsidiaries and related entities. Check whether any shares are pledged, charged, subject to a court order or affected by an agreement with another shareholder. Where ownership passes through several entities, trace the structure to identify the ultimate beneficial owners. Do not rely solely on a cap table, management presentation or spreadsheet supplied by the seller. Reconcile these materials with corporate records and supporting documents. Any unexplained difference in share numbers, ownership percentages or past allotments should be resolved before completion. 3. Review the Articles and Existing Shareholder Agreements A private limited company’s shares may be subject to transfer restrictions. The articles of association may contain rights of first refusal, pre emption rights, consent requirements or other conditions which affect a proposed sale. A shareholders’ agreement may contain similar provisions. The investor should determine whether the seller can transfer the shares without obtaining approval from other shareholders or the company’s board. It is also important to check whether existing investors have rights to participate in the sale or purchase shares before an external buyer can proceed. Review any provisions covering reserved matters, board appointments, voting thresholds, dividend policy, information rights, exit rights and dispute resolution. These terms can influence the investor’s practical control, even where the investor acquires a substantial percentage of the shares. If the acquisition depends on particular governance rights, ensure the rights are properly documented and legally enforceable. Where necessary, the company’s articles and relevant agreements should be amended as part of the transaction, with the required approvals. 4. Conduct Thorough Financial and Tax Due Diligence A company may appear profitable while carrying substantial liabilities. Review its audited financial statements, management accounts, bank statements, cash flow forecasts, borrowing arrangements and outstanding payment obligations. Compare reported revenue with customer contracts, invoices and actual receipts where appropriate. Assess the company’s working capital, dependence on major customers, supplier concentration and ability to meet upcoming financial commitments. Identify loans from founders or related parties, personal guarantees, unpaid dividends, contingent liabilities and commitments which may not be obvious from the balance sheet. Tax due diligence is equally important. Examine income tax returns, tax assessments, notices, GST registrations and returns, tax payments, withholding tax compliance and any ongoing disputes. Check whether the company has received demands or notices from tax authorities and whether provisions for disputed amounts are adequate. Review the company’s accounting practices and any transactions with directors, promoters or related businesses. Unusual payments, unexplained loans or recurring transactions with connected parties may indicate financial or governance risks. The purpose is not simply to confirm past performance. It is to understand the company’s real financial position and estimate whether potential liabilities could reduce the value of the shares after acquisition. 5. Check Litigation, Contracts and Regulatory Compliance Search for material litigation, arbitration, insolvency proceedings, regulatory investigations and notices from government authorities. Ask the company to disclose pending and threatened disputes, then verify significant matters through available court, tribunal and regulatory records where feasible. Examine key commercial contracts, including major customer and supplier agreements, leases, distribution arrangements, technology licences and financing documents. Look for change of control clauses, termination rights, exclusivity restrictions and consent requirements. A transaction could affect important commercial relationships even if the company remains legally operational. The review should also cover licences and registrations required for the company’s business. Depending on the sector, these may include environmental permissions, factory licences, sector specific approvals, professional registrations or data protection obligations. Check employment agreements, provident fund and employee state insurance compliance where applicable, workplace policies, intellectual property ownership and material employment disputes. Confirm the company owns or has valid rights to use the software, trademarks, patents, designs and other intellectual property on which its business depends. For investors seeking to invest in small businesses, these checks are especially useful where the target has limited internal controls or relies heavily on its founder. A smaller business may have fewer formal records, making independent verification and clear contractual protections particularly important. 6. Establish a Fair Share Valuation and Compliant Payment Structure The agreed price should reflect the company’s financial position, growth prospects, liabilities and commercial risks. Investors may use earnings, revenue, asset value or comparable transactions as valuation references, depending on the business. A valuation should also consider dilution risks, shareholder rights and the difference between a minority stake and a controlling interest. For a transaction involving a non resident, FEMA pricing rules may apply. The relevant requirements depend on the type of transfer, the residency of the buyer and seller, the investment route and any applicable exceptions. A valuation report may be required from a suitably qualified professional. Do not assume the price agreed between the parties automatically satisfies Indian regulatory requirements. In particular, transfers between residents and non residents can be subject to pricing conditions. The transaction team should confirm the applicable rules before finalising consideration. Payment arrangements also require attention. Verify the permitted payment route, supporting bank documentation, tax withholding obligations where relevant and any restrictions on deferred consideration or escrow arrangements. The agreement should clearly specify the price, payment dates, conditions for release of funds and consequences of a failure to complete. 7. Understand the FEMA Reporting and Closing Requirements A share transfer involving an overseas investor may trigger reporting obligations under India’s foreign exchange framework. Depending on the transaction, Form FC TRS may be required for a transfer of equity instruments between a resident and a non resident. The applicable reporting responsibility and deadline should be confirmed under the current rules. The parties should also identify any required government or regulatory approvals, company approvals, consents from existing shareholders and supporting documents. Where the investment involves a sector regulated by a specialist authority, additional requirements may apply. At company level, ensure the transfer instrument and supporting documents are properly executed, applicable stamp duty is addressed and the company updates its register of members and share records as required. The investor should obtain evidence of registration of the transfer and any replacement or updated share certificate, as applicable. A closing checklist helps coordinate payment, delivery of documents, approvals, transfer registration and post completion filings. It should assign responsibility for each action and set deadlines so no obligation is overlooked after the purchase price has been paid. Investors should review the current requirements published by the Reserve Bank of India and the Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade before completion. Rules, forms and reporting procedures can change, so older checklists should not be treated as definitive. 8. Negotiate Strong Contractual Protections Due diligence identifies risks, but the transaction documents determine how some of those risks are allocated between buyer and seller. A share purchase agreement should accurately describe the shares being sold, the consideration, completion conditions and each party’s obligations. Consider representations and warranties covering ownership of shares, authority to sell, financial statements, taxes, litigation, contracts, licences, employment matters and compliance with law. Where the review reveals specific concerns, seek tailored indemnities rather than relying only on general warranties. The agreement may also provide for an escrow, retention of part of the price, completion accounts or other protections where commercially appropriate. Liability caps, claim deadlines and exclusions should be reviewed carefully because they can limit the buyer’s ability to recover losses. For a minority investment, negotiate suitable information rights, board representation or observer rights, reserved matters, anti dilution provisions and exit mechanisms. These rights should be consistent with the company’s articles and other shareholder arrangements. If the transaction involves a newly formed vehicle or a wider investment structure, separate incorporation and operational planning may also be needed. Online company registration can be part of establishing a new Indian entity, but registering a company does not replace the due diligence required when buying shares in an existing business.   Conclusion Buying shares in an Indian private limited company can create valuable opportunities, but overseas investors should not rely on the seller’s assurances alone. They should verify ownership, examine financial and tax records, review contracts and litigation, confirm foreign investment eligibility and understand the applicable valuation and reporting rules. A well planned due diligence process, supported by carefully drafted transaction documents, helps investors identify risks before completion and establish a clearer basis for long term ownership. Because foreign investment rules and filing requirements can change, the final transaction structure and compliance steps should be checked against the law in force at the time of investment. Frequently Asked Questions Can a foreign investor buy shares in an Indian private limited company? Yes, subject to the applicable foreign investment policy, FEMA requirements, sectoral limits, entry route and any required approvals. The investor’s circumstances and the company’s business activities should be assessed before the transaction proceeds. What documents should an overseas investor request before buying shares? Common documents include incorporation records, articles of association, shareholder agreements, registers of members, share certificates, financial statements, tax records, key contracts, licences, litigation disclosures and details of borrowings or security interests. The exact list depends on the company and transaction. Is government approval always required for foreign investment in India? No. Investment may be permitted under the automatic route in eligible sectors. Prior government approval is required in specified circumstances, including certain restricted sectors and investments covered by additional approval conditions. What is Form FC TRS? Form FC TRS is used to report certain transfers of equity instruments between residents and non residents under India’s foreign exchange reporting framework. Whether it applies, who must file it and the relevant deadline depend on the transaction and the rules in force. Why is legal due diligence important before purchasing shares? Legal due diligence can uncover ownership disputes, transfer restrictions, litigation, regulatory breaches, contractual risks and undisclosed liabilities. It helps the investor assess the transaction accurately and negotiate appropriate protections before paying the purchase price.
Foreign Investment Documents
What Legal Documents Are Required for a Foreign Company Investing in an Indian Business?
Foreign Investment Documents are essential for overseas companies planning to establish, acquire or invest in an Indian business. The required paperwork depends on the investment structure, the investor's country of incorporation, the sector involved and whether the transaction requires government approval. Preparing the correct documents early can help prevent delays, satisfy regulatory requirements and protect the investor's commercial interests. India permits foreign investment through several routes, including wholly owned subsidiaries, joint ventures and acquisitions of shares in existing companies. Each route involves different corporate records, contractual arrangements and regulatory filings. Understanding these requirements before transferring funds or signing transaction documents helps investors establish a compliant and commercially sound investment. 1. Corporate Documents of the Foreign Investor The first step is to establish the foreign investor's legal identity, ownership and authority to invest in India. Where the investor is a foreign company, the Indian authorities or other relevant parties may require its certificate of incorporation, constitutional documents, registered office details and particulars of its directors. A current extract from the relevant overseas company registry may also be useful. The foreign company's board should normally approve the proposed investment through a board resolution or another valid corporate authorisation. The resolution should identify the Indian investee company, the proposed investment amount, the nature of the transaction and the authorised signatory. If the investment is made through a holding company or another intermediate entity, additional documents may be required to establish the ownership chain and beneficial ownership. The investor should also prepare identity and address documents for relevant individuals, as required by the applicable process. Documents executed outside India may require notarisation, apostille or consular authentication, depending on the country concerned, the document type and the applicable requirements. Investors should confirm the correct procedure before arranging execution. 2. Documents Required to Incorporate an Indian Subsidiary A foreign company establishing an Indian subsidiary must prepare incorporation documents under the Companies Act, 2013. The principal documents include the proposed company's Memorandum of Association (MoA) and Articles of Association (AoA). The MoA sets out the company's objectives and permitted scope of activities, while the AoA establishes its internal governance framework.The incorporation application also requires details of the proposed directors, subscribers, registered office and share capital. Identity and residential address documents are required for relevant individuals. The registered office generally requires appropriate address evidence and supporting documentation, such as a lease agreement or owner consent where applicable. Where a foreign company subscribes to shares in the proposed Indian entity, its certificate of incorporation and a board resolution authorising the subscription may be required. The overseas entity may also need to provide its constitutional documents and details of its authorised representative. Applications are generally submitted through the Ministry of Corporate Affairs' SPICe+ incorporation process and associated forms. Additional requirements can apply depending on the subscriber's location, nationality and legal status. Investors should decide the proposed shareholding, directors, authorised capital and governance arrangements before filing. A carefully prepared incorporation package can reduce the risk of resubmission or delay. 3. Documents for Foreign Direct Investment Approval Not every foreign investment requires prior government approval. Eligible investments may proceed under the automatic route, subject to applicable sectoral caps, conditions and reporting requirements. Other investments require approval under the government route. Where government approval is necessary, the application may require the investor's incorporation documents, constitutional records, board resolution, financial statements and details of its ownership structure. The application may also require a description of the proposed investment, the business activities involved, the source and flow of funds, and the target company's existing and proposed shareholding pattern. Existing joint venture agreements, previous regulatory approvals and other transaction documents may be relevant. The exact requirements depend on the sector, transaction and investor. Additional information may be requested where the ownership structure is complex or the applicable foreign investment policy imposes specific conditions. Investors should review the current foreign direct investment policy and relevant sectoral rules before filing. An approval application should not be treated as a substitute for checking whether the proposed activity and ownership structure are legally permissible. 4. Investment Agreements and Shareholder Documents Foreign investors acquiring an interest in an Indian business should document the commercial arrangement clearly. For a joint venture, the shareholders' agreement typically defines ownership rights, board representation, reserved matters, funding obligations, dividend policy, transfer restrictions and exit arrangements. The agreement should reflect the parties' commercial understanding while complying with Indian law. For an acquisition, the share purchase agreement generally records the sale terms, consideration, completion conditions, representations and warranties, indemnities and obligations of the parties. Depending on the transaction, additional documents may include a subscription agreement, investment agreement, disclosure letter, amended Articles of Association and intellectual property licence. These documents should be reviewed together. For example, a shareholders' agreement may provide for investor consent over major decisions, while the Articles should be checked to ensure the intended corporate arrangements are appropriately reflected. Investors should also examine existing agreements before acquiring shares. Transfer restrictions, pre emption rights, lender consents and change of control clauses may affect whether the proposed transaction can proceed. 5. Documents Required for Share Issuance or Share Transfers The documentation differs depending on whether the foreign investor subscribes to newly issued shares or acquires existing shares from another shareholder. For a fresh issue, the Indian company may need the relevant corporate approvals, subscription documents, evidence of receipt of consideration and supporting valuation documentation. The company must also follow the applicable Companies Act procedures for issuing shares. For a secondary acquisition, the parties may require a share purchase agreement, transfer instruments where applicable, evidence of existing ownership and documents supporting the agreed consideration. The transaction must comply with applicable pricing rules and foreign exchange requirements. Where foreign investment is subject to reporting under the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 (FEMA), the relevant filing must be completed through the prescribed process. For eligible issues of equity instruments to a non resident, the Indian company generally files Form FC GPR through the Reserve Bank of India's Foreign Investment Reporting and Management System (FIRMS) within 30 days of the issue. Specified transfers of equity instruments may require Form FC TRS. Other reporting requirements depend on the transaction type. The supporting documents and filing requirements should be confirmed with the authorised dealer bank and the relevant advisers before completion. Missing or inconsistent information can delay reporting and create compliance issues. 6. Banking and Source of Funds Documents Foreign investment consideration must be transferred through permitted channels and in accordance with applicable foreign exchange rules. The investor should coordinate with the Indian company's authorised dealer bank to confirm the payment process, remittance requirements and supporting records. Depending on the transaction, the bank may request the investment agreement, board approvals, investor identification documents, remittance instructions and evidence of the source of funds. A Foreign Inward Remittance Certificate (FIRC), bank advice or other remittance evidence may be relevant to demonstrate receipt of funds. The precise document issued and its use depend on the bank's procedures and the transaction. The investment amount should correspond with the approved or agreed transaction terms and applicable pricing requirements. Any discrepancy between the amount remitted, the investment documents and the shares issued should be resolved promptly. Investors should retain complete records of remittances, allotments and related approvals. These records may be needed for regulatory reporting, tax compliance, audits and future transfers or repatriation. 7. Tax, Valuation and Due Diligence Documents Tax and valuation documents help establish whether the transaction is commercially justified and complies with applicable law. Depending on the structure, relevant documents may include audited financial statements, tax returns, tax residency certificates, valuation reports and transfer pricing documentation. A tax residency certificate may be relevant when a party seeks benefits under an applicable double taxation agreement, subject to the relevant conditions. For acquisitions, legal and financial due diligence should examine the target's corporate records, material contracts, licences, litigation, intellectual property, employment obligations, tax exposures and outstanding borrowings. Valuation requirements depend on the transaction, instrument and applicable regulatory framework. A valuation report may be required to demonstrate compliance with pricing rules or support the agreed consideration. Where the target has overseas subsidiaries, related party transactions or significant intellectual property assets, additional records may be necessary to understand the legal and tax implications of the investment. 8. Documents for Post Investment Compliance Document preparation continues after incorporation or completion. Indian companies with foreign investment may have ongoing corporate, tax and foreign exchange reporting obligations. Depending on the transaction, the company may need to maintain statutory registers, board and shareholder resolutions, share certificates or dematerialised share records, and updated ownership information. Foreign investment reporting may include applicable filings through FIRMS, including Form FC GPR or Form FC TRS. Eligible Indian companies and LLPs with foreign investment may also be required to submit the annual Foreign Liabilities and Assets return, subject to applicable rules and exemptions. Additional obligations may arise from sector specific licences, competition law, employment law, data protection and other regulatory requirements. A compliance calendar should identify each filing, its due date, the responsible person and the supporting records required. This helps the company maintain accurate documentation and prepare for future fundraising, audits or an eventual sale. 9. Prepare a Transaction Specific Document Checklist A single checklist cannot cover every foreign investment in India. A new subsidiary, a joint venture, a share subscription and an acquisition each involve different legal steps. Investors should begin by identifying the transaction structure, investor entity, sector, ownership chain and applicable approval route. The checklist can then be divided into corporate documents, transaction agreements, regulatory approvals, banking evidence, valuation records and post completion filings. Where an overseas entity is investing through a group company, the documentation should explain the relationship between the entities and establish the authority of the investing company. Beneficial ownership and source of funds should be reviewed where relevant. Companies exploring international business investment in India should also consider future capital raising, management arrangements and exit options while preparing their documents. Addressing these matters early can reduce the need for amendments and additional approvals later. Where the investor plans to establish a new Indian subsidiary, incorporation and investment documentation should be coordinated rather than prepared in isolation. This helps ensure the company's ownership, constitutional documents and funding arrangements are consistent.   Conclusion Preparing the correct legal documents is an essential part of investing in an Indian business. Corporate records establish the investor's identity and authority, transaction agreements define commercial rights, and regulatory documents demonstrate compliance with applicable Indian law. The required paperwork depends on the proposed structure, sector and investment route. A transaction specific checklist, supported by early legal and regulatory review, can reduce delays and protect the investor's interests. Foreign companies should verify document requirements before signing agreements, transferring funds or submitting applications. Where the investor intends to register a foreign business or establish an Indian subsidiary, coordinating incorporation, funding and regulatory reporting from the outset can provide a more reliable foundation for long term operations in India. Frequently Asked Questions What documents are required for a foreign company to invest in India? Common documents include the foreign company's certificate of incorporation, constitutional documents, board resolution, ownership details, identity documents, investment agreements and relevant financial records. Additional documents depend on the transaction and applicable approval requirements. Does a foreign company need government approval to invest in India? Not always. Eligible investments may proceed under the automatic route, subject to applicable conditions. Investments in sectors or circumstances covered by the government route require the relevant prior approval. Do foreign company documents need to be apostilled for Indian incorporation? Depending on the country, document type and applicable requirements, documents may need notarisation, apostille or consular authentication. The precise requirements should be confirmed before execution and filing. Which RBI forms are relevant to foreign investment in India? Form FC GPR generally applies to eligible issues of equity instruments to non residents. Form FC TRS applies to specified transfers of equity instruments. Other forms and reporting obligations may apply depending on the transaction. Is a valuation report mandatory for every foreign investment? No single valuation requirement applies to every transaction. The need for a valuation report depends on the investment instrument, transaction type, applicable pricing rules and other relevant legal requirements. What happens if foreign investment documents are incomplete? Incomplete or inconsistent documents can delay incorporation, approval, payment processing or regulatory reporting. Depending on the issue, additional information, corrected filings or remedial steps may be necessary.    
Foreign Investment Diligence,
What Legal Due Diligence Should a Foreign Investor Conduct Before Acquiring an Indian Company?
Foreign Investment Diligence is a critical step for overseas businesses planning to acquire an Indian company. It helps investors verify ownership, identify undisclosed liabilities, assess regulatory compliance and understand the legal risks associated with a proposed transaction. A thorough review also provides a basis for negotiating the purchase price and protecting the investor through appropriate contractual safeguards. India offers significant opportunities for cross border acquisitions. However, its corporate, foreign exchange, tax and sector specific regulations require careful assessment before an investment proceeds. Understanding the target company's legal position before signing or completing a transaction can prevent costly disputes and unexpected liabilities. 1. Examine Corporate Records and Ownership The first step in legal due diligence is to establish whether the target company has a valid corporate structure and whether the seller has the legal right to transfer the shares. Review the certificate of incorporation, Memorandum of Association, Articles of Association, statutory registers, annual returns and financial statement filings. Board resolutions and shareholder approvals should also be examined to confirm the company's authority to enter into the proposed transaction. The investor should verify the shareholding pattern against the company's register of members, share certificates and historical allotment records. Particular attention should be given to pledged shares, outstanding options, convertible instruments, beneficial ownership and existing shareholder agreements. Undisclosed pre emption rights, transfer restrictions or competing ownership claims may delay or prevent the acquisition. Searches through the Ministry of Corporate Affairs portal can help verify corporate filings and identify inconsistencies requiring further investigation. 2. Verify Foreign Investment and FEMA Compliance Foreign investors must assess whether the proposed acquisition complies with the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 (FEMA), the Foreign Exchange Management (Non Debt Instruments) Rules, 2019, and the applicable foreign direct investment policy. The review should establish whether the target operates in a sector permitting the proposed level of foreign ownership. Investors must also determine whether the automatic route or government approval route applies, considering sectoral caps, licensing conditions and other restrictions. Historical foreign investments require equal attention. Examine the target's past share issuances and transfers involving non resident investors, applicable pricing requirements and reporting through the Reserve Bank of India's Foreign Investment Reporting and Management System (FIRMS). Relevant filings may include Form FC GPR for eligible foreign investment issuances and Form FC TRS for specified transfers of capital instruments. Outstanding reporting obligations, pricing discrepancies and previous FEMA contraventions should be identified and assessed. The Reserve Bank of India publishes its Master Direction on Foreign Investment in India, which provides an important reference for the applicable regulatory framework. Investors should also assess restrictions concerning investors or beneficial owners connected with countries sharing a land border with India. Depending on the ownership structure and applicable policy, government approval may be required. 3. Investigate Financial, Tax and Contingent Liabilities A company may appear profitable while carrying significant undisclosed legal or tax exposure. Legal and financial due diligence should therefore be conducted together. Review income tax returns, goods and services tax (GST) filings, tax assessment orders, withholding tax records and pending disputes. Where relevant, examine transfer pricing documentation, related party transactions, customs liabilities and tax exposures arising from cross border arrangements. The investor should also investigate outstanding loans, corporate guarantees, security interests, undisclosed borrowings and potential breaches of financing agreements. Existing lenders may have consent rights or contractual restrictions triggered by a change in ownership. Contingent liabilities deserve particular attention. These may arise from litigation, tax proceedings, employee claims, regulatory penalties or contractual indemnities. The findings should be quantified where possible. Material exposures may justify a lower purchase price, an escrow arrangement, a specific indemnity or a condition requiring the seller to resolve the issue before completion. 4. Review Material Contracts and Commercial Obligations Existing contracts can significantly influence the value and continuity of an acquired business. Review agreements with major customers, suppliers, distributors, lenders, landlords, technology providers and strategic partners. Examine termination rights, exclusivity provisions, minimum purchase commitments, liability limitations and restrictions on assignment. Change of control clauses are particularly important. Certain contracts may allow a counterparty to terminate the agreement, renegotiate its terms or withhold consent when ownership changes. The investor should identify which agreements are essential to the target's revenue, supply chain or operations. If a critical customer contract can be terminated following the acquisition, the transaction may carry greater commercial risk than its financial statements suggest. Existing shareholder agreements, joint venture arrangements and financing documents should also be reviewed for consent requirements and restrictions on transfers. 5. Assess Litigation, Regulatory Proceedings and Insolvency Risks A comprehensive legal review should examine pending, threatened and historical disputes involving the target company, its subsidiaries and, where relevant, its promoters. These may include commercial litigation, arbitration, tax disputes, employment claims, intellectual property proceedings and investigations by regulatory authorities. The review should not rely solely on the seller's disclosures. Relevant court, tribunal and regulatory records should be checked independently where accessible. Insolvency proceedings, winding up petitions and enforcement actions may materially affect the transaction. Investors should assess the nature of each dispute, the amount involved, the potential business impact and the likelihood of an adverse outcome. Existing orders, injunctions or restrictions may also affect the target's ability to operate or transfer assets. Where the risk cannot be resolved before completion, transaction documents should address it through appropriate warranties, indemnities, escrow arrangements or other negotiated protections. 6. Verify Intellectual Property and Technology Rights Intellectual property can be a major component of an Indian company's value, particularly in technology, manufacturing, pharmaceuticals, consumer products and digital services. The investor should verify ownership and registration of trademarks, patents, copyrights, designs, domain names and proprietary software. Registration alone may not establish complete ownership if earlier assignments or licensing arrangements are defective. Employment agreements and contracts with consultants, developers and other service providers should be examined to confirm whether intellectual property created for the business was properly assigned to the company. Review existing licences, infringement claims, renewal deadlines and restrictions on commercial use. Technology businesses should also assess third party software licences, open source obligations and cybersecurity incidents. Where the target depends on intellectual property owned by a promoter or an affiliated entity, the investor should determine whether continued access is contractually secured. An acquisition may lose substantial value if essential technology or branding rights cannot be retained after completion. 7. Examine Employment, Property and Environmental Compliance Employment liabilities can continue after an acquisition, depending on the transaction structure and applicable law. Review employment contracts, employee benefit obligations, provident fund and other social security contributions, gratuity liabilities, workplace policies and pending employment disputes. The review should also cover applicable workplace safety requirements and compliance with the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace Act, 2013. Key employee retention arrangements and existing employee share incentive plans may influence the post acquisition integration strategy. For companies owning or leasing property, verify title documents, encumbrances, lease terms, land use permissions and required registrations. Property disputes, defective title or restrictions on transfer may affect operational continuity. Environmental clearances, pollution control consents and industry specific permits should be examined where relevant. Historical non compliance can result in remediation costs, penalties or restrictions on business activities. The scope of these investigations should reflect the target's sector, locations and operational footprint. 8. Check Competition Law and Sector Specific Approvals An acquisition may require regulatory approval even when the parties have agreed on all commercial terms. Under India's competition law framework, certain acquisitions, mergers and amalgamations qualify as combinations requiring notification to the Competition Commission of India (CCI). The assessment depends on applicable asset, turnover and transaction value thresholds, along with relevant exemptions. Where notification is required, the transaction generally cannot be completed before the required approval. The parties should therefore assess competition requirements early and incorporate the regulatory timetable into the acquisition plan. The Competition Commission of India provides information on combination regulation and filing requirements. Additional approvals may apply in regulated sectors such as banking, insurance, telecommunications and financial services. Listed companies may also be subject to securities regulations, including applicable takeover and disclosure requirements. Investors should confirm whether existing licences remain valid following the acquisition and whether a change of control triggers prior approval, notification or fresh licensing. 9. Convert Due Diligence Findings into Transaction Protections The value of legal due diligence lies in how effectively its findings influence the transaction. A detailed report should classify issues according to their severity, financial impact, likelihood and ability to be resolved. Critical findings should be escalated before the investor becomes contractually committed. For example, an ownership defect may require correction before completion. An unresolved tax dispute may justify a specific indemnity. A contract requiring third party consent may become a condition precedent to closing. The share purchase agreement should include appropriate representations and warranties concerning ownership, accounts, tax, litigation, regulatory compliance and material contracts. Specific indemnities may be needed for identified risks. Other protections may include purchase price adjustments, escrow arrangements, retention of part of the consideration and clearly defined post completion obligations. The enforceability and commercial suitability of each mechanism should be assessed under the applicable law. The investor should also ensure that disclosures are sufficiently detailed and that responsibility for historical non compliance is clearly allocated. 10. Plan the Acquisition and Post Completion Compliance Due diligence should continue until material issues have been resolved or appropriately addressed in the transaction documents. The closing plan should identify regulatory approvals, corporate authorisations, lender consents, third party permissions and other conditions required before completion. Responsibility for each action should be assigned to the relevant party. Following completion, the investor may need to update corporate records, make applicable regulatory filings, integrate compliance systems and monitor outstanding indemnity claims. For foreign investors, the proposed acquisition should also be assessed against future funding requirements, dividend distributions and exit plans. Reviewing these matters early can help avoid restructuring costs and unnecessary regulatory complications. A well planned foreign business investment strategy combines legal risk assessment with commercial objectives, enabling the investor to make an informed decision about the target's value and long term prospects. Conclusion Acquiring an Indian company requires a clear understanding of its legal position, regulatory obligations and potential liabilities. Effective foreign investment due diligence examines corporate ownership, FEMA compliance, taxation, contracts, litigation, intellectual property, employment and sector specific approvals. The objective is not merely to identify problems. It is to determine their commercial significance and establish appropriate safeguards before the acquisition is completed. Foreign investors who approach due diligence as an integrated legal and commercial exercise are better placed to negotiate informed terms, manage regulatory risks and build a sustainable presence in India. Early legal assessment can also help identify whether foreign entity registration or another compliant business structure is appropriate for the investor's wider plans in India. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) Q1. What is foreign investment due diligence? Foreign investment due diligence is the process of investigating a target company's legal, financial, tax and regulatory position before an overseas investor commits funds or completes an acquisition. It identifies risks and informs transaction pricing, contractual protections and closing conditions. Q2. Why is legal due diligence important before acquiring an Indian company? It helps identify ownership disputes, undisclosed liabilities, regulatory violations, contractual restrictions and pending litigation. The findings enable investors to negotiate appropriate protections and determine whether the acquisition remains commercially viable. Q3. How long does legal due diligence take in India? The duration depends on the target's size, sector, corporate structure, document availability and complexity of its operations. A straightforward acquisition may require a few weeks, while a complex or regulated transaction may take several months. Q4. Is FEMA compliance mandatory for foreign investors acquiring an Indian company? Foreign investment transactions must comply with applicable FEMA provisions, foreign investment rules and reporting requirements. The precise obligations depend on the transaction structure, investor status, sector and nature of the securities being acquired. Q5. Can an investor withdraw after discovering legal risks? Whether an investor can withdraw depends on the transaction documents, the stage of negotiations and any binding commitments already made. Due diligence findings may support renegotiation or termination where the relevant contractual conditions permit it. Q6. What happens if due diligence reveals undisclosed liabilities? The investor may seek a price adjustment, additional warranties, specific indemnities, escrow protection or corrective action before completion. If the risks are unacceptable, the investor may decide not to proceed, subject to its contractual obligations.
Foreign Investment Structure,
How to Structure a Foreign Investment in an Indian Company
Foreign Investment Structure is one of the most important decisions an overseas investor must make before entering the Indian market. The right structure can help protect ownership rights, manage regulatory obligations, optimise tax efficiency and provide a clear route for future expansion or exit. A poorly planned structure, however, can create unnecessary costs, compliance difficulties and restrictions on repatriating profits. India offers several investment options, including wholly owned subsidiaries, joint ventures and limited liability partnerships. The appropriate choice depends on the investor’s commercial objectives, the sector involved, the source of funds and the proposed level of control. Understanding these factors early helps investors establish a compliant and commercially sustainable presence in India. 1. Choose the Right Investment Vehicle The first decision is whether to establish a new Indian entity, acquire an interest in an existing business or operate through another permitted business presence. A wholly owned subsidiary is often suitable for foreign companies seeking complete ownership and operational control. Incorporated as an Indian company, it provides a separate legal identity, subject to applicable corporate and regulatory requirements. The parent company can retain strategic oversight while the subsidiary conducts local business. A joint venture may be preferable when an investor needs local market knowledge, distribution networks, technical expertise or an established customer base. The arrangement requires careful negotiation of ownership percentages, management responsibilities, reserved matters, transfer restrictions and dispute resolution mechanisms. A limited liability partnership (LLP) can suit certain professional and service businesses. Foreign investment in an LLP is permitted subject to applicable foreign exchange rules, including sectoral eligibility and the absence of foreign investment linked performance conditions where required. An LLP may not be suitable where investors need conventional equity shares, standard venture capital arrangements or familiar corporate governance mechanisms. Branch offices, liaison offices and project offices offer alternative forms of presence for specific purposes. They are not interchangeable with an Indian subsidiary. A liaison office, for example, generally cannot undertake commercial trading activities or earn income in India. The permitted activities and approval requirements for each structure must be assessed before proceeding. 2. Check Foreign Investment Rules Before Committing Funds India regulates foreign direct investment under the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 (FEMA), the Foreign Exchange Management (Non Debt Instruments) Rules, 2019, and the applicable foreign investment policy. The next step is to determine whether the proposed investment is permitted in the relevant sector and whether it requires government approval. Under the automatic route, eligible foreign investment can proceed without prior government approval, subject to the applicable conditions. Under the government route, prior approval from the competent authority is required. Sectoral caps may restrict foreign ownership. Certain activities also impose licensing, security, minimum capitalisation or other operating conditions. Some sectors prohibit foreign investment altogether. Investors should also examine restrictions relating to countries sharing a land border with India. Under the applicable policy, investments involving entities incorporated in such countries, or investments where the beneficial owner falls within the specified restrictions, may require government approval. The analysis should consider ownership and beneficial ownership, rather than relying solely on the investor’s place of incorporation. The Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade publishes official foreign investment policy resources. These should be reviewed alongside current notifications and sector specific rules before the investment structure is finalised. 3. Decide Between a Greenfield Investment and an Acquisition Investors entering India must decide whether to establish a new business or acquire shares in an existing company. A greenfield investment involves establishing a new operation. It allows the investor to design the ownership structure, governance arrangements, operations and compliance systems from the outset. However, incorporation, licensing, recruitment and infrastructure development may require considerable time and resources. An acquisition or investment in an existing company may provide immediate access to customers, employees, assets and established operations. It can also introduce inherited liabilities, unresolved litigation, tax exposures and regulatory deficiencies. Before acquiring shares, conduct legal, financial, tax and commercial due diligence. Review the company’s constitutional documents, material contracts, licences, intellectual property ownership, employment arrangements, outstanding borrowings, litigation and compliance history. The transaction documents should clearly allocate responsibility for pre completion liabilities and address warranties, indemnities, conditions precedent and post completion obligations. The choice should reflect the investor’s timeline, risk appetite and commercial objectives rather than the initial investment cost alone. 4. Select the Appropriate Investment Instrument The instrument used to invest affects ownership, voting rights, returns and exit options. Equity shares are commonly used when an investor seeks direct ownership and participation in the company’s growth. The percentage held determines economic ownership, but it does not automatically guarantee control over every business decision. Compulsorily convertible preference shares (CCPS) and compulsorily convertible debentures (CCDs) may be appropriate where the parties require different economic rights or a staged conversion into equity. Their terms must comply with applicable foreign exchange rules, company law and pricing requirements. For eligible start ups, convertible notes may provide another funding option, subject to the specific conditions under Indian law. They should not be treated as a universally available substitute for equity or debt. The parties should agree on valuation, conversion mechanics, voting rights, dividend entitlements, dilution protection and the treatment of future funding rounds before executing the investment documents. 5. Structure Ownership and Management Rights Carefully Foreign investors should decide how much control they need and how that control will operate in practice. A majority shareholding may provide substantial influence, but effective control also depends on the company’s Articles of Association, board composition, voting thresholds and contractual arrangements.  In a joint venture, the shareholders’ agreement should define reserved matters requiring investor consent. These may include changes to the business, additional borrowing, major capital expenditure, related party transactions, new share issues and the sale of significant assets. The agreement should also address board appointment rights, information access, dividend policy, deadlock resolution and restrictions on share transfers. Exit provisions deserve particular attention. Tag along rights, drag along rights, put and call options and agreed sale procedures may help manage future disagreements. However, these provisions must be drafted consistently with Indian company law, foreign exchange regulations and applicable pricing rules. Where appropriate, corresponding provisions should be incorporated into the company’s Articles of Association. A contractual right alone may not provide the intended corporate effect in every situation. 6. Evaluate Taxation and Repatriation Tax planning should form part of the initial structuring exercise, rather than being addressed after funds have been invested. An Indian subsidiary may be subject to corporate income tax, goods and services tax (GST), withholding tax and other applicable levies. The tax treatment depends on the nature of the business, its transactions and the relevant statutory provisions. Cross border payments also require careful analysis. Dividends, interest, royalties and service fees may have different tax consequences. An applicable double taxation agreement may provide relief, subject to its conditions, domestic anti avoidance rules and beneficial ownership requirements. Investors should examine how profits will be distributed and how capital may eventually be returned. Dividends, share transfers, buybacks and liquidation proceeds follow different legal and tax rules. Foreign exchange requirements and applicable pricing restrictions may affect the timing and amount of repatriation. An apparently tax efficient structure may create difficulties if it lacks commercial substance or does not align with the investor’s actual business arrangements. Legal and tax advisers should therefore assess the structure together. 7. Plan Incorporation, Reporting and Ongoing Compliance Once the structure has been selected, the investor should prepare an implementation plan covering incorporation, capital funding, approvals and regulatory reporting. For a new company, the incorporation process typically involves name approval, constitutional documents, director appointments, registered office details and filings with the Ministry of Corporate Affairs. Foreign corporate shareholders may also need to provide authenticated corporate records and board authorisations. The Ministry of Corporate Affairs provides access to company incorporation services and statutory filing resources. After incorporation, the company must ensure that foreign investment is received through permitted channels and that the issue of securities complies with applicable pricing and documentation requirements. Where an Indian company issues equity instruments to a non resident under the foreign direct investment framework, Form FC GPR is generally required to be filed with the Reserve Bank of India within 30 days of the issue. Other transactions may trigger separate reporting obligations. Annual foreign liabilities and assets reporting may also apply. The company should maintain a compliance calendar covering corporate filings, tax returns, licence renewals, board meetings and foreign exchange reporting. 8. Match the Structure to Long Term Business Objectives A foreign investment structure should support the investor’s plans beyond the initial transaction. Businesses expecting rapid growth may prioritise future fundraising, employee incentives and a straightforward ownership structure. Strategic investors may focus on operational control, technology protection and integration with overseas operations. Investors entering through a local partner may place greater emphasis on governance safeguards and dispute resolution. Understanding the available foreign investment opportunities is equally important. The selected structure should allow the business to expand into additional permitted activities, introduce new investors and adapt to changing commercial requirements without creating avoidable restructuring costs. Investors should also consider competition law, sector specific licences, data protection, intellectual property ownership and employment obligations where relevant. These requirements can influence both the feasibility and cost of the proposed investment. A legal review before committing funds can identify restrictions early, clarify the approval process and help ensure that the investment documents reflect the commercial agreement. Conclusion Structuring foreign investment in India requires more than selecting an ownership percentage or incorporating a company. Investors must consider sectoral eligibility, investment instruments, governance rights, taxation, regulatory reporting and exit options as parts of one integrated decision. A carefully designed structure can reduce regulatory uncertainty, protect investor interests and provide a sound foundation for sustainable business operations. Reviewing these issues before funds are committed helps investors make informed decisions and avoid preventable legal and commercial complications. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) Q1. What is the best structure for foreign investment in India? A wholly owned subsidiary is often suitable for investors seeking full ownership and a distinct Indian operating entity. A joint venture may be more appropriate where a local partner adds strategic value. The right structure depends on sectoral restrictions, control requirements, taxation and future exit plans. Q2.Can a foreign investor own 100% of an Indian company? Yes, in sectors where 100% foreign investment is permitted, subject to the applicable entry route, sectoral conditions and other legal requirements. Some sectors impose ownership caps, approval requirements or additional restrictions. Q3.Is government approval required for every foreign investment in India? No. Eligible investments can proceed under the automatic route without prior government approval. Investments falling under the government route require approval from the competent authority before proceeding. Q4.Can foreign investors invest in an Indian LLP? Yes, subject to applicable foreign exchange rules. Eligibility generally depends on whether the sector permits the relevant level of foreign investment under the automatic route and whether the prescribed conditions are satisfied. Q5.How can foreign investors repatriate profits from India? Profit repatriation may occur through permitted mechanisms such as dividends, subject to applicable tax and foreign exchange requirements. Capital can also be returned through eligible share transfers, buybacks or liquidation, depending on the circumstances and relevant rules. Q6.What laws govern foreign investment in India? The principal framework includes FEMA, the Foreign Exchange Management (Non Debt Instruments) Rules, 2019, applicable foreign investment policy provisions and the Companies Act, 2013. Sector specific legislation, tax laws and other regulatory requirements may also apply.  
MHCO Updates
Supreme Court
SUPREME COURT HOLDS YES BANK ADMINISTRATOR LACKED AUTHORITY TO WRITE OFF RS. 8,415 CRORE AT-1 BONDS
In Yes Bank Limited & Anr. v. Axis Trustee Services Limited & Ors. (Civil Appeal No. 3182 of 2025 and connected matters, judgment dated 15 October 2026), the Supreme Court dismissed the appeals and upheld the Bombay High Court’s decision setting aside the write-down of Yes Bank’s Basel III-compliant Additional Tier 1 (“AT-1”) Bonds. The Court held that the Administrator could not write down the bonds contrary to the final Reconstruction Scheme or exercise a regulatory power vested in the Reserve Bank of India (“RBI”). BACKGROUND Yes Bank issued AT-1 Bonds worth Rs. 3,000 crores in December 2016 and Rs. 5,415 crore in October 2017. Following a steep deterioration in Yes Bank’s financial position, the Central Government imposed a moratorium on 5 March 2020, and the RBI appointed an Administrator. A draft reconstruction scheme published on 6 March 2020 expressly provided for the AT-1 Bonds to be permanently written down in full. However, the final Yes Bank Limited Reconstruction Scheme, notified on 13 March 2020, omitted that clause. On 14 March 2020, the Administrator nevertheless ordered a full write-down of the Rs. 8,415 crore AT-1 Bonds. Therefore, the trustee and bondholders challenged the action, and the Bombay High Court set it aside. CONTENTIONS OF THE PARTIES The appellants, including Yes Bank, the RBI and the Union of India, contended that the Administrator was empowered under Section 36ACA of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 (“Banking Regulation Act”), the RBI’s Master Circular on Basel III Capital Regulations and the Information Memorandum to write down the bonds. They argued that invocation of Section 45 of the Banking Regulation Act triggered the point of non-viability and that the write-down, followed by SBI’s infusion of capital, was necessary to revive Yes Bank. They also argued that the reconstruction process continued after notification of the Scheme. The respondents contended that the final Reconstruction Scheme deliberately omitted the draft provision for writing down the bonds. They argued that the Administrator could not write down the bonds after the Scheme came into force and that, under the Master Circular, the relevant action had to be taken before reconstruction. They further submitted that the power to determine the write-down at the point of non-viability belonged to the RBI, not the Administrator. COURT’S FINDINGS The Court held that the omission of the write-down clause from the final Reconstruction Scheme reflected a conscious decision not to deal with the bonds through the Scheme. The Administrator could not reverse that decision. A general clause preserving existing instruments did not confer a specific power to write down the bonds; the action was therefore ultra vires the Master Circular read with the Reconstruction Scheme. The Court further held that the phrase “before reconstitution” in the Master Circular meant before the Reconstruction Scheme came into force, and not at any time while the Scheme’s effects continued. Once the point of non-viability was triggered, the RBI was required to determine the treatment of the bonds. The Administrator, whose statutory role was to act as a substitute for the Board of Directors, could not assume the RBI’s regulatory power. The Court observed that financial necessity could not excuse non-compliance with the prescribed procedure. It accordingly dismissed the appeals and clarified that its observations would not influence other pending proceedings. MHCO COMMENT The judgment reinforces that regulatory and administrative powers must be exercised strictly within the limits prescribed by statute and the applicable regulatory framework. The commercial necessity of rescuing a bank cannot override the authority, timing and procedure mandated by law. The decision is also significant for the distinction it draws between the Administrator’s powers as a substitute for the Board of Directors and the RBI’s independent regulatory powers. The Administrator cannot assume a function specifically entrusted to the RBI. Further, a general provision preserving existing contracts cannot be used to imply a specific power that the final Reconstruction Scheme has omitted. For market participants and financial institutions, the judgment highlights the importance of consistency between a reconstruction scheme, the RBI’s capital regulations and the terms of the relevant bond documentation. It also draws attention to investor-protection concerns surrounding the sale of complex, high-risk capital instruments to retail investors. Date: 19 October 2026 By: Mr.  Bhushan Shah, Partner Ms. Sayali Kshirsagar, Associate Mr. Abhishek Nair, Associate Disclaimer: This legal update is intended for general information purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Readers are advised to seek specific legal advice before acting upon any information contained herein.
Litigation
LITIGATION UPDATE | SUPREME COURT UPHOLDS OCCUPANTS' RIGHTS IN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS, REINSTATES MHADA ORDERS FOR PERMANENT ALTERNATE ACCOMMODATION
Overview: The Supreme Court of India, vide its judgment dated July 23, 2026, in Mahabanoo Contractor and Another v. Kalikund Developers and Others (Civil Appeal No. 9342 of 2026), set aside a Bombay High Court decision and ruled in favour of the occupants of a redeveloped cessed building. The Supreme Court upheld the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority’s (MHADA) orders directing the developer to execute the Permanent Alternate Accommodation Agreement (PAAA) and hand over possession. The ruling firmly establishes that a PAAA executed under the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Act, 1976 (MHAD Act) and the Development Control (DC) Regulations is not merely a private arrangement but is governed by a statutory scheme protecting occupants' rights. Brief Background and Facts: The dispute arose regarding a cessed building unfit for human habitation, which the developer (Respondent No. 1) undertook to demolish and redevelop under the MHAD Act, obtaining a No Objection Certificate (NOC) from MHADA. Occupants vacated the premises on the assurance of alternate accommodation in the reconstructed building. The first Appellant and the late Ms. Gool Peshotan Unwalla were joint occupants of Room No. 5 on the third floor of the old building. Following the redevelopment, the developer refused to honour the PAAA executed on 17 October 2019, which granted the Appellants three flats (inclusive of fungible area) totalling 309.98 sq. mtrs. Instead, the developer offered a smaller area, contending that the fungible Floor Space Index (FSI) was not fully utilized due to a reduction in the building's height from 34 to 30 floors. Upon the Appellants' complaint, MHADA issued orders on 28 May 2025, and 27 June 2025, directing the developer to register the PAAA and hand over possession, which were followed by a Show Cause Notice on 10 July 2025 when the developer failed to comply with the orders. The developer challenged the orders and the Show Cause Notice in the Bombay High Court, which stayed MHADA's actions by classifying the PAAA as a "private arrangement" amenable only to civil court jurisdiction. The Hon’ble High Court recorded the developer's undertaking to keep two flats encumbrance-free until a civil suit was decided. Subsequently, the developer filed a civil suit challenging the validity of the PAAA in its entirety. Contentions of the Parties: The Appellants (Occupants): The Appellants emphasized the statutory definition of 'occupant' under the MHAD Act and Rule 33(7) of the DC Regulations. They argued that the PAAA was a statutory requirement enforced by MHADA, not a private arrangement. They further relied on contemporaneous public notices, the certified list of tenants by MHADA, and the developer's NOC, all of which documented the first Appellant as a rightful joint occupant. The Respondents (Developer): The Respondents contended that the PAAA was a concocted document executed by a former expelled partner without proper authorization. They argued that upon the original tenant's death, the tenancy was extinguished, leaving the Appellants without rights to the premises. Furthermore, they asserted the carpet area allotted in the PAAA was excessive compared to the original tenement's area, especially considering that the FSI was not fully utilised. Court’s Findings: The Division Bench of the Supreme Court consisting of the Hon’ble Justice Shri J.B. Pardiwala and the Hon’ble Justice K. Vinod Chandran made several key observations: Statutory Nature of the PAAA: The Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the High Court had misconstrued the PAAA as a mere private arrangement. It was held that the PAAA was executed under the MHAD Act, which is a statutory scheme, and was meant to facilitate redevelopment while ensuring that the original occupants were not displaced. Its enforcement therefore fell squarely within MHADA's regulatory purview. Definition of 'Occupant': The Hon’ble Court held that the MHAD Act defines "occupier" under Section 2(25) as encompassing more than just the statutory tenants. It was held that the first Appellant’s status as an occupant was firmly established by multiple contemporaneous documents, including the developer's own 2010 public notice and MHADA's certified list. Developer's Conduct and Internal Disputes: The Hon’ble Court rejected the developer's attempt to use internal partnership disputes to invalidate agreements made with the occupants, stating that the occupants were not even made a party to the consent terms executed between the partners. It was held that the settlement of inter-se disputes between partners cannot absolve the developer from obligations under a validly executed PAAA, on the basis of which vacant possession was originally obtained. Additionally, it was held that the developer's failure to utilize the full fungible area does not justify resiling from the agreed allotments. Mala Fide Civil Suit: The Hon’ble Court found the civil suit filed by the developer to be misconceived and mala fide in nature because it sought to challenge the Appellants' very claim as occupants contrary to the undertaking given by the developer to the High Court. Judgment: The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the Bombay High Court's judgment and reviving MHADA’s original orders. The Hon’ble Court directed the developers to execute the PAAA and hand over possession of the three apartments within two months and stated that if they failed to do so, the Appellants were entitled to recover damages calculated at the monthly rental value of the flats. The Hon’ble Court further restrained the High Court from proceeding with the developer's civil suit and imposed heavy costs on the developer. MHCO Comment: This pivotal judgment strictly curtails the dilatory tactics often employed by developers in redevelopment schemes to avoid handing over agreed-upon permanent alternate accommodations. By reiterating that the PAAA is a statutory instrument governed by the MHAD Act, rather than a standard private contract, the Supreme Court has fortified the regulatory authority of bodies like MHADA to intervene and enforce these agreements. For real estate practitioners and developers, this ruling serves as a stern reminder that internal management disputes or changes in project specifications cannot be utilized to prejudice the vested statutory rights of certified occupants. By: Mr. Akash Jain, Associate Partner Mr. Divyang Salvi, Associate Ms. Diva Lathi, Associate
SEBI Update
REGULATORY UPDATE | SEBI ORDERS VARANIUM CLOUD TO RESTORE & DISGORGE FUNDS OVER IPO & RIGHT ISSUE FRAUD
The Securities and Exchange Board of India (“SEBI”) on 25 August 2025 passed a Final Order against Varanium Cloud Limited (“VCL”) and its key management for alleged fraudulent and misleading activities in connection with its Initial Public Offer (IPO), Rights Issue and subsequent disclosures. BACKGROUND The proceedings stemmed from SEBI’s preliminary examination pursuant to media reports and complaints regarding VCL’s financial statements and corporate announcements, which led to an Interim Order dated 10 May 2024 against VCL and its MD/Chairman, Harshwardhan Hanmant Sabale (Mr Sabale). VCL raised approximately Rs 40.39 crore through its IPO in September 2022 (primarily for Edge Data Centres and Edmission Digital Learning Centres) and proposed a further Rs. 48.45 crore through a Rights Issue in September 2023. SEBI examined the utilisation of issue proceeds, financial statements, Prospectus disclosures, corporate announcements, related-party transactions, and the role of directors, the CFO, the merchant banker and other intermediaries. SEBI’S FINDINGS SEBI found that VCL misrepresented its financial statements and prospectus by showing fictitious sales and purchases, and that its disclosures on utilisation of IPO proceeds (including the Statement of Deviation dated 17 November 2023) were incorrect and misleading. SEBI found that IPO and Rights Issue proceeds of Rs. 62.51 crore were diverted to related parties and other entities, including Rs. 32.73 crore transferred directly to Mr Sabale’s personal account. BM Traders (operated by Mr Raj Jagtani) received Rs. 19.66 crore in aggregate from the issue proceeds, of which Rs. 15.60 crore was transferred onwards; and that no adequate evidence of genuine business purpose was produced. SEBI found several business announcements by VCL to be false and unsubstantiated. SEBI also found that the Company also failed to support the substantial increase in reported revenues (including those of its US subsidiary) with invoices, contracts or employee details. Pending litigation was omitted from the Letter of Offer, and the Prospectus contained material omissions and misstatements. Liability was fastened on the Company, its MD, Executive Directors and CFO. SEBI found that the lead manager, First Overseas Capital Limited (FOCL), failed to exercise independent due diligence and did not disclose pending litigation. SEBI rejected FOCL’s defence that  it  could  rely  on  the  Company’s  representations  and  third-party  reports. Athos Capital Advisors Private Limited (ACAPL) and Mr Jinesh Mehta were held to have aided and abetted the misrepresentations; ACAPL received approximately Rs. 2.50 crore from VCL, and Mr Mehta admitted drafting portions of the Prospectus and assisting with fundraising. SEBI’S DIRECTIONS VCL was directed to bring back Rs. 62.51 crore (with 12% p.a. interest) within three months. Mr Sabale was directed to disgorge unlawful gains of Rs. 128.77 crore (with 12% p.a. simple interest) to the Investor Protection and Education Fund. VCL and Mr Sabale were debarred from the securities market for 7 years. ACAPL and Mr Jinesh Mehta were debarred for 2 years; Mr Raj Jagtani/BM Traders for 4 years; the Executive Directors and CFO (Mr Vinayak Jadhav, Mr Mukundan Raghavan and Mr Fahim Shaikh) for 1 year; and FOCL for 2 years (to run consecutively with an earlier debarment). Monetary penalties were also imposed, including Rs. 20.40 crore on Mr Sabale, Rs. 13 crore on VCL and Rs. 10.10 crore on Mr Raj Jagtani. Proceedings against the Company Secretary (Ms Hetal Somani) and a Non-Executive Director (Mr Kalpesh Acharekar) were disposed of without directions or penalty, the allegations against them being found unsustainable. MHCO COMMENT The order is significant for its treatment of misrepresentation in financial statements and public-issue disclosures, diversion of IPO and Rights Issue proceeds, and the accountability of directors, KMPs and intermediaries. It reiterates that a lead manager must conduct independent due diligence and cannot merely rely on the issuer’s representations or third-party reports. SEBI did not fasten liability on every director or officer; allegations against the Company Secretary and non-executive director were dropped for want of material. Overall, SEBI characterised the matter as a fraudulent scheme of raising public funds on misleading disclosures, followed by diversion of proceeds and creation of a false picture of the Company’s performance. The restoration, disgorgement, debarment and penalty directions reflect the seriousness with which the conduct was viewed. By: Mr. Bhushan Shah, Partner Mr. Abhishek Nair, Associate Ms. Sayali Kshirsagar, Associate
Rea Estate
BOMBAY HIGH COURT ALLOWS REFUND OF STAMP DUTY PAID ON CANCELLED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
The Bombay High Court, vide judgment dated 20 August 2026 in Sai Innovation v. Joint District Registrar and Collector of Stamps, Pune City & Ors. (Writ Petition No. 7566 of 2016), has held that a Development Agreement which fails to achieve its intended purpose and is subsequently cancelled can qualify for refund of stamp duty under Section 47(c)(5) of the Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958 (“the Stamp Act”), and that such an agreement can avail the extended limitation period under the proviso to Section 48(1) where stamp duty has been calculated with reference to Article 25 of Schedule I. Background: Sai Innovation had entered into a Development Agreement (“said Agreement”) dated 15 April 2013 with the owners of land at Village Mauje Balewadi, Pune, for development of approximately 8,000 sq. metres of land and paid stamp duty under Article 25 read with Article 5 of Schedule I to the Stamp Act. The owners were unable to obtain sanction of the building plans within a reasonable time, and disputes subsequently arose between the parties. The said Agreement was therefore cancelled by a registered Deed of Cancellation (“said Deed”) dated 18 February 2014, registered on 24 February 2014, and the consideration received was returned. Sai Innovation thereafter applied on 7 April 2014 for refund of the stamp duty. The Respondent Nos 1&2 vide their orders dated 11 August 2014 and 6 December 2014 (“Impugned Orders”) respectively, rejected the refund application of the Petitioner, principally on the ground that the said Agreement was not a “conveyance” and therefore did not fall within the proviso to Section 48(1) of the Stamp Act. Issue: The Court dealt with the following issues: Whether the said Agreement had failed to achieve its intended purpose to attract Section 47(c)(5) of the Stamp Act; Whether a Development Agreement could avail the benefit of the proviso to Section 48(1), particularly where stamp duty was calculated as per Article 25 of Schedule I; Whether the reference to “actual, open possession” in Clause 13 of said Agreement be interpreted as transfer of possession to the developer, notwithstanding Clause 11 of the said Agreement which described the developer as a licensee; and Whether the Respondents could subsequently rely upon the alleged transfer of possession as a ground for rejecting the refund claim, when the refund claim had initially been rejected by the Impugned Orders on other grounds, and the issue of possession did not form part of the reasons recorded in those orders. Key Findings The Court, while differentiating between Section 47 and Section 48 of the Stamp Act, held that while Section 47 is the main provision that gives the right to a refund of stamp duty, Section 48 only deals with the time limit. In the present case, the proposed development under the said Agreement was never acted upon, and the parties later cancelled the said Agreement by the said Deed. As a result, the transaction had clearly failed to achieve its intended purpose under Section 47(c)(5) of the Stamp Act. The Court therefore said the refund claim had to be examined first under Section 47 and could not be turned down simply by pointing to the limitation period. On the question of possession, the Court held that Clause 13 of the said Agreement could not be read in isolation from Clause 11. Although Clause 13 referred to “actual, open possession”, Clause 11 expressly described the developer’s rights as those of “a licensee for development”. Reading the Agreement as a whole, the Court concluded that the developer was granted only a limited contractual licence to enter the property and undertake development activities, and that there was no transfer of legal or exclusive possession. The Court also noted that the absence of a separate possession receipt, by itself, did not establish that possession had been transferred. Held In light of the above reasoning, the Court allowed the writ petition and quashed the Impugned Orders passed by the Respondents. The Court held that the refund application was filed within the extended period prescribed under the proviso to Section 48(1) of the Stamp Act and, accordingly, rejected the Respondents’ objection that the claim was barred by the ordinary six-month limitation period. MHCO Comment Parties seeking refund of stamp duty on a cancelled Development Agreement should note that Section 47 governs the substantive entitlement to refund, while the proviso to Section 48(1) determines the applicable limitation period. Further, the legal character of a Development Agreement should be assessed by reading the same meaningfully and not in isolation from other clauses provided therein. By: Mr. Bhushan Shah, Partner Ms. Meeta Kadhi, Associate Partner Mr. Saptadip Nandi Chowdhury, Associate
LIFE AT MHCO
Need Help? Chat with us