Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

2. The respondents are a society registered under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act. The IPL is a sub-committee of the respondents.

One Lalit Modi was at the material time appointed by the respondents as the Chairman and Commissioner of the IPL. The Respondents own and control the commercial rights in respect of a cricketing event known as Indian Premier League (IPL).

3. In November, 2007, the respondents invited tenders to grant the media rights in relation to the IPL.

47. The matter, however, does not rest there. The question is whether the respondents officers, other than the said Lalit Modi had participated in the formation or the execution of the contracts or had anything to do with them subsequently or were aware of and had endorsed the agreements dated 25.3.2009.

48. Mr.Sundaram stated that the agreements dated 25.3.2009 were entered into collusively between the said Lalit Modi and the petitioner/ WSG-Mauritius. He submitted that the said Lalit Modi was the only person involved in the matter as is evident from the fact that he is a signatory to all the agreements. He reiterated what is stated in paragraph 8 of the affidavit in reply that the respondents came to know these facts only through the media reports. Thereupon the respondents scrutinized the contracts and were shocked to notice the provisions thereof especially clauses 10.4 and 27.5. It is averred that all these clauses were unauthorized and came to the knowledge of the present Honorary Secretary and other office bearers of the respondents as well as the members of the IPL Governing Council, This Order is modified/corrected by Speaking to Minutes Order 33 arbp978-10 other than the said Lalit Modi only by that time and not earlier. It is averred in paragraph 9 of the affidavit-in-reply that these contracts were never placed before and were neither approved nor ratified by the IPL Governing Council.

15. IPL- BCCI and WSG."

51. Mr.Sundaram submitted that the reference to the agreements was vague, without any particulars and was in an extremely guarded manner with a view to conceal the existence of the agreements. He submitted that agreements as important as these should have been given prominence in the minutes, whereas they have been mentioned only in the appendix under the caption of "accounts for the year 2009". In the affidavit in reply, it is averred that the minutes were prepared by the said Lalit Modi himself and that the contracts were never placed before the IPL Governing Council and that none of the members had any occasion to go through the contracts since they had been filed in the caption "vendor contracts"; that the media rights license agreements cannot classify as vendor contracts and that thereby the existence of the contracts was suppressed by the said Lalit Modi with a view to cheat the respondents and that the contracts were never approved or ratified by the IPL Governing Council and therefore cannot be enforced against the respondents.

5. MSM wishes to re-emphasize here that the 'Facilitation Fee' of Rs.425 crores to WSG Mauritius is for : 
            a.         the original option fee of $25million
            (Rs.115 crores approximately) to extend the
            rights to years 6 till 10,





            b.          an additional fee over the 9 years of
the contract of Rs.310 crores. These fees were to compensate WSG Mauritius for returning its rights for IPL season 2 - 10 to BCCI in favour of MSM and were necessary if MSM was to secure the rights to IPL season 2-10. However, the potential rating incentive at the end of year 5 of $35 million (Rs.160 crores) under the agreement dated 21 January 2008 was This Order is modified/corrected by Speaking to Minutes Order 43 arbp978-10 eliminated, and c. as a consequence of these commercial negotiations the net incremental amount attributable to WSG Mauritius giving up its IPL Indian subcontinent rights is Rs.150 crores.