Get Involved (Home Page)

Dear Fellow Investors,

This is a forum where all of us aggrieved investors (Fixed Deposit holders and people who have invested vide Promissory Notes and Bill Discounting Schemes) can get together and take on Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd. for getting our hard earned money back.

We must act in a united manner and use our strength of numbers to get this recalcitrant company to pay us our dues or suffer due and just punishment for violating our rights.

This is an open invitation to everyone (Fixed Deposit holders and other investors) to join the concerted effort by putting forth your investment details (Fixed Deposit / Promissory Note / Bill Discounting Scheme) on the link provided below.

Instructions to fill the data are as under:

1. Go to the link http://goo.gl/forms/AbBlkr1kcW  

2. Follow these steps

• Form is to be used only for one FD/BD/PN at a time
• Enter name in capital letters only of primary FD holder as it appears in the FD or of BD/PN holder as it appears on Bill Discounting Receipt or Demand Promissory Note for eg: VEDANTA DESIKAN
• Do not add Mr. or Mrs. or any other prefix unless it appears on the FD/BD/PN
• Select Type of Instrument from drop down menu. If you have an FD, select Fixed Deposit or otherwise select Bill Discounting or Promissory Note
• Enter FDR No. which is 9 letters, for eg: FDB034345 or CDB034345. If you have BD/PN enter the BDR No. which is 6 letters, for eg: 996454
• Do not enter any space or any wrong character in FDR No.
• Enter FD/BD/PN Amount in numbers without commas, for eg: 75000
• Do not enter Rs. or Rupees or /-
• Enter your date of investment
• Enter your date of maturity
• Enter a valid 10 digit mobile number. Do not add 0 or 91 in front
• Enter a valid alternate number such as landline or mobile
• If the primary FD/BD/PN holder is a senior citizen please select Yes. Otherwise select No.
• Enter city of residence, for eg: MUMBAI
• Check data
• Press submit
• Send a scanned copy of FD/BD/PN to heliosfds@gmail.com File name of scanned copy should be FD/BD/PN number. If you have an FD, file name should be for eg: FDB034345 or CDB034345. If you have BD/PN file name should be, for eg: 996454 

3. If you have any confusion please check our Contacts Page and sms any of the designated persons who will get back to you when they can.

4. We will be collecting contributions towards expenses incurred in the legal fight against H&M. So please only put your details (Fixed Deposits / Promissory Notes / Bill Discounting) if you are ready to contribute up to 1% of your total investment or Rs. 2000/- whichever is higher.

Winding Up Appeal OSA 19 of 2016 - Hearing update dated 30/07/2018 (Order)

Please find the order (on this link) of the Madras High Court, in the aforesaid matter against Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd.

Please note that as on date a sum of INR 15.29 cr. has been deposited by Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd.

The High Court has indicated that it would start disbursing this amount to the depositors on a pro-rata basis. However, the disbursement authority has not been designated, to our best knowledge, as of now. However, it is likely that the said individual could be someone from the Economic Offences Wing department, or the District Revenue Officer, Chennai.

In the interim, we would advise all depositors to send letters to the EOW along with photocopies of the deposits (preferably notarized/attested true copies) requesting the EOW to acknowledge and add their names to the list of deposit holders to whom money has to be repaid. The said letters should be sent by email and RPAD (Registered Post Acknowledgment Due) to keep proof of service of the same on EOW.

I also note that several depositors are continuously writing to me as a matter of right, stating that they are not represented by me/my advocates before the Madras High Court. I do not know where this notion has come in. I have never said that I will represent the depositors legally. I have not taken any money from any of the depositors and have only collected information and shared the same free of cost. I have always asked each depositor to either stand up and fight individually or form an association and fight collectively. I have directed individual depositors to Whatsapp Groups and Associations, so that they could fight collectively. Several depositors have formed associations and are fighting legal battle against the company. Several individual depositors have filed cases in their individual capacity and I salute such independent depositors and associations! Rather than sit at home, they are actually doing something about recovering their money. Please stand up and fight alongside, and don't think for one moment that this blog is something where you can get information and your money back by sitting at home!

Winding Up Appeal OSA 19 of 2016 - Hearing update dated 30/07/2018

After several minor inconsequential hearings, the matter was heard. Several depositors brought to light that Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd. had offloaded its stake in Helios and Matheson Analytics New York (HMNY) to the tune of USD 2.2 million (approx. INR 15 crores). Despite freezing of accounts by EOW, Chennai, this money seems to have disappeared without being deposited in Court. It was further pointed out that Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd. was not complying with its own promise of payments into Court.

The lawyers for Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd. narrated the same tale. They sought time to deposit further amounts, declared that till date they have deposited INR 16.19 crores in Court and said that the Court must start disbursing these amounts until further amounts are deposited.

The Court was facing the conundrum of appropriate method of disbursement, the competent authority to disburse amounts and the inequities that would be faced by piecemeal disbursement. Hence the Court deferred the matter to 17th August 2018 directing Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd. to deposit more amounts and explain where the proceeds of the sale of shares of HMNY went. The Court will also attempt to find an appropriate disbursement method and competent authority for the same. It is unlikely that this will happen in the next hearing, but we shall wait and see on 17th August 2018.

H&M Delisted

Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd. has been de-listed from both BSE (circular link here) and NSE (circular link here).

Winding Up Appeal OSA 19 of 2016 - Hearing update dated 21/11/2017

The hearing which was scheduled on 20.11.2017 got deferred to 21.11.2017 on account of the judge being under the weather.

As per the last hearing, the order of which can be accessed here, the Economic Offences Wing had been requested to attend today's hearing. A report was sought as to the amount of money available in the accounts of Helios and Matheson Information Technology Limited, which accounts were frozen by EOW. The Government Pleader appointed on behalf of EOW sought time to be impleaded in the matter and file a status report on the investigation thus far against Helios and Matheson Information Technology Limited and the amounts available in the bank accounts frozen by the EOW.

The lawyers on behalf of Helios and Matheson Information Technology Limited sought this amount frozen by EOW to be deposited in court so that it may earn interest and can be used to disburse to the depositors. EOW sought time to reply on the said request.

The court adjourned the matter to allow EOW time to be impleaded.

The question of incorrectness of the list of Fixed Deposit holders was raised. The lawyers on behalf of Helios and Matheson Information Technology Limited admitted of the possibility that the list of depositors submitted in court may be incorrect as their servers containing the data were seized by the EOW. The Court directed EOW to also file a status report on the same.

Next date of hearing will be updated soon.

Winding Up Appeal OSA 19 of 2016 - Hearing update dated 30/10/2017

The last scheduled hearing of 21.07.2017 did not take place but Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd. did deposit 2.65 crores in court around that time. Today, the hearing took place and the lawyers appearing on behalf of Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd. offered to deposit another 0.12 crores. This takes the total deposited amount to about 10 crores as per our understanding. 

The lawyers for Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd. also highlighted verbally that they would deposit another 6.5 crores by April 2018. They also requested that the Madras HC direct Economic Offences Wing (EOW) to submit the total amount available in the frozen bank accounts, so that it could be added to the amount considered deposited in court. EOW was directed to appear in the next hearing.

A few depositors raised an important point: namely disbursement of sums already deposited. However, there was no consensus as neither an administrator, nor a liquidator has been appointed to ensure that the disbursement is done in a fair and just manner.

The Division Bench of the Madras HC heard the parties and expressed concern for the Fixed Deposit holders. However, the court felt that it was trying its best to balance the interest of the creditors versus taking strict action against the company, given that the company is making some payments and is attempting to follow the scheme proposed by the company in court. Considering this, it is important to highlight to the Madras HC, the falsity of the proposal given by Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd. in respect of the incomplete/falsified list of Fixed Deposit holders submitted to court, the complete omission of the Promissory Note holders and the holders of other instruments of debt.

Next date of hearing is 20.11.2017.

Winding Up Appeal OSA 19 of 2016 - Hearing update dated 21/04/2017

In the last post we had mentioned that the Division Bench of the Madras High Court was likely to dispose the case by confirming the winding up order of the Single Judge of the High Court. However, no order was issued in this regard. It seems that the Division Bench has done a volte face by permitting the company, Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd. to proceed with the vague payment plan drawn up.

As per the order that can be accessed here,  Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd. has been permitted to make a payment of INR 2.65 crores by 21.07.2017 to show their bonafides in repaying the depositors. They have been directed to deposit another INR 13.54 crores within one year, a further sum of INR 13.54 crores within 18 months and balance sum in 24 months. Till date the company has deposited around INR 7.2 crores in court.

The order is vague and imprecise considering that the court has not given directions on whether the amount is to be deposited in court or directly into the accounts of the depositors. If it is the latter, there is no clarity on the accounts that will be credited as Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd. has not submitted till date a proper list of Fixed Deposit and Promissory Note holders. Further, it is unclear how the court arrived at the amounts that need to be deposited by Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd. as we have proof that the dues payable far exceed the sum mentioned by the court.

Clearly, the court is being misled by Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd. and its lawyers.

Next date of hearing is 21.07.2017.

Winding Up Appeal OSA 19 of 2016 - Hearing update dated 21/11/2016 (HM Affidavit)

This post is in addition to the earlier mentioned post where we had mentioned that we would upload the affidavit submitted by Helios and Matheson Information Technology Limited. Click the below link to access the same.

Affidavit copy.

Winding Up Appeal OSA 19 of 2016 - Hearing update dated 21/11/2016

Firstly, apologies are in order as a few hearings have elapsed in this matter and we were unable to update the same. 

Just to bring you up to date, the matter was not moving fast enough and now suddenly it has seen some drastic developments. The Division Bench (two judge bench) which was sitting over this appeal by Helios and Matheson Information Technology Limited had earlier stayed the order of winding up passed by the single judge effectively putting on hold any developments in the case against the company. 

Recently, the Division Bench went through the case in detail and found no reason to stay the winding up order passed by the single judge. The Division Bench asked Helios and Matheson Information Technology Limited to give good reason why winding up of the company should not be ordered and the appeal filed by the company should not be dismissed.

The lawyers on behalf of Helios and Matheson Information Technology Limited argued that the company was willing to pay the depositors and make good their debts and that a chance should be given to the company. The Division Bench then asked Helios and Matheson Information Technology Limited to deposit Rs. 2 crores every month in court till all the depositors are paid out. However Helios and Matheson Information Technology Limited argued that the amount was too large and it would be unable to pay the same on a regular basis. The Division Bench then asked the company to consider Rs. 1 crore every month, but the lawyers for Helios and Matheson Information Technology Limited cited hardship and difficulty in making such regular payments. They submitted that they would deposit Rs. 25 lakhs every quarter and Rs. 7 crore in lumpsum by 31.12.2017. They further submitted that they would endeavor to clear the entire outstanding by 31.12.2018.

The Division Bench was not satisfied with the submissions of Helios and Matheson Information Technology Limited. However considering the interests of the depositors it passed orders by which the appeal was disposed off. We are awaiting the orders and the contents thereof. From what was heard in court it seems that:

a) The appeal is disposed off with the order of the single judge for winding up being confirmed.

b) Stay on winding up seems to be lifted. The matter seems to be referred back to the discretion of the single judge whether to wind up the company or permit acceptance of certain amounts on a periodic basis from Helios and Matheson Information Technology Limited and disburse the same to the depositors.

c) Stay on SFIO investigation seems to be lifted and SFIO may be empowered to investigate the company once again.

d) A committee seems to have been formed for prioritization of disbursal of amounts available in Court (Rs. 6 crore and a further Rs. 1 crore in frozen bank account) to depositors having deposits below Rs. 50,000. It seems that there is confusion on the members of this committee and we will await the order for details on the same.

e) Helios and Matheson Information Technology Limited has been directed to deposit minimum Rs. 1 crore before 31.12.2016 as an act of good faith.

However the above can only be cross verified the moment we get hold of the order copy. Update on that will follow soon.

Further we are informed that Helios and Matheson Information Technology Limited has deposited a further amount of Rs. 20 lakhs in court.

Winding Up Petition 143/2015 - Hearing Update (24/11/2016)

The matter came up for hearing today before the single judge bench. As the matter was subject to the outcome of the other hearing in appeal and the order of the appeal court had not reached the single judge, he postponed the matter to 14.12.2016.

However, the single judge made enquiries with the Registry of the Madras High Court to identify the total amount deposited by Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd. in Court. It was revealed that a sum total of Rs. 6 crores was available with the Court and another Rs. 20 lakhs had been recently deposited by Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd. However, the Registry informed the single judge that the Rs. 20 lakhs had not been credited as the adressee on the instrument was incorrect. The single judge directed the lawyers of Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd. to rectify the same. Further it was informed that around Rs. 1 crore was in the frozen bank accounts of Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd. which bank account had been frozen by EOW directions. Thus a total of Rs. 7crores is currently available for disbursement to depositors plus another Rs. 20 lakhs subject to Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd. rectifying the error made while depositing the instrument in court.

The single judge did not pass any orders regarding disbursal and kept the matter pending until the order of the Appeal Court is received. Also we will have our hands on the affidavit filed by Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd. shortly as earlier mentioned. The same will be uploaded within the next week. Next hearing is on 14.12.2016.

Winding Up Petition 143/2015 - Hearing Update (10/11/2016)

The matter was heard today. As Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd. had still not moved the Division Bench on the Appeal and had not expedited the matter in appeal, the Single Judge expressed his inability to do much.

He advised the advocates on behalf of the depositors to take up the matter before the Division Bench in the appeal and lift the stay obtained by Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd. as the Company was not taking any action and was stalling the process of justice.

The advocates on behalf of Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd. expressed their desire to disburse the amount deposited in court to the depositors. The Single Judge stated that he would order the formation of a Committee comprising of the Official Liquidator and a few depositors and representatives of Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd. to ensure fair disbursement. However, as it seems this is unlikely and looks like a ploy to buy further time by Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd.

Order of the Single Judge will be uploaded once it is received.

Next date of hearing is 24.11.2016.

Winding Up Petition 143/2015 - Hearing Update (22/09/2016)

The matter was heard before the Single Judge Bench of the Madras High Court today. 

As directed by the Court in the previous hearing, Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd. have submitted an affidavit allegedly relating to their latest financial affairs. As soon as the same is made available, we will circulate it.

In the last hearing the Single Judge had clarified that since a stay had been obtained in the appeal before the Division Bench against the winding up order, the Single Judge could not enforce a winding up until the stay was lifted. However the Single Judge seemed upset that Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd. was not pursuing the appeal in an expeditious manner and delaying unnecessarily because it had obtained the stay. The Single Judge cautioned Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd. on its dilatory tactics and suggested that in the event the appeal was not moved along expeditiously the Single Judge would take up any of the winding up petitions freshly filed and pass another order of winding up.

Further the Single Judge suggested to Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd. to come up with a Scheme of Arrangement (consolidated settlement) for all unsecured creditors, whether depositors, holder of promissory notes, bill discounting receipts, lenders etc. The Single Judge suggested that this would be the best way forward in  the event Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd. wished to avoid prosecution.

The current Single Judge seems to understand the notions of speedy justice but his hands are tied because of the stay order obtained by Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd. in the appeal before the two Judge Bench of the Madras High Court.

Next hearing will be on 10th November 2016.

Winding Up Appeal OSA 19 of 2016 - Hearing update dated 10/08/2016

The matter was heard but the lawyers for Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd. did not turn up.

Several intervention applications have been filed by other depositors and the same were permitted to become third parties to the proceedings.

Next hearing after two weeks.

Winding Up Petition 143/2015 - Hearing Update (18/08/2016)

While there have been a few hearings between our last update on the Winding up Petition No. 143/2015, most have been of little consequence.

Just to refresh our memory, in the order passed by the Single Judge in the said CP No. 143/2015, Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd. was ordered to be wound up for its inability to meet its financial obligations. However Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd. filed an appeal in OSA 19/2016 before the two Judge bench and obtained a temporary stay against the order of the Single Judge, pending the outcome of the appeal.

The matter came up for hearing today before the Single Judge. The arguments were basically on whether the temporary stay operates against the winding up order in CP No. 143/2015 or against the winding up order in all the CPs, i.e. 144 and 145. The Single Judge stated that the stay operates against all winding up orders passed and until that is not lifted, the Single Judge cannot do much.

However, the Single Judge is responsive and has ordered Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd. to file an affidavit stating the current affairs of the company, details of tangible and intangible assets and correct statement of amounts due to the depositors. Further the Single Judge has directed that the 7 crores already deposited shall be put into a Fixed Deposit until further notice.

Next hearing date is 23/09/2016.

OSA 19/2016 and CMP 2253/2016 - Hearing Update - 21.07.2016

It has been some time since our last update which had not happened on account of the case languishing due to court vacations and non-listing of the matter.

Finally, the matter was posted before the Division Bench on 21.07.2016 for hearing but due to a procedural technicality the Judges re-posted the matter for hearing on 10.08.2016.

While the journey to Chennai seemed fruitless, several other aspects of the visit seemed to be fruitful. Firstly, while the Appellate Bench (Division Bench) seems lethargic, the new judge hearing the winding up matters seems pro-active and inclined to dispense justice in a speedier sense. We have seen several investors have filed cases and urge others to follow suit. This will in turn put pressure on the Appellate Bench and result in complete justice. Secondly, NCLT (National Company Law Tribunal) has started functioning in Chennai. This body is intended to replace CLB (Company Law Board) and give speedier justice especially in cases where companies are not honoring fixed deposits taken from public investors. However, we are yet to get complete details on the powers, functions, jurisdiction and scope of the NCLT. We will keep you posted once the same is obtained.

Winding Up Appeal OSA 19 of 2016 - Hearing update dated 15/02/2016

As you are aware, in our last update we had mentioned that Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd. had appealed against the winding up order of the single judge of the Madras High Court and had obtained a stay order before the Division Bench (two judge bench) of the said High Court. You can access the stay order by clicking on this link.

It is very clear that in obtaining the stay order Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd. has through its lawyers done several things:

- They have not given notice to the depositors of the appeal and have gone and obtained the order behind our backs.

- They have misstated material facts before the court.

- They have misled the court into believing that the scheme proposed by them was a workable scheme. The scheme was clearly not workable when it did not even cover the depositors in entirety or the Promissory Note and Bill Discounting holders.

- They have wrongly stated to the court that 7 crores was deposited which was more than that required to discharge the debt of the petitioners. While the petitioners were only 3, we had filed intervention applications which covered over 45 crores worth of depositors and this aspect was fraudulently not disclosed to the judges.

- They have tried to play a sympathetic approach by claiming that they are willing to settle the dues of small creditors when we have data that a majority of small depositors are not covered by the scheme and there is no mention of any Promissory Note and Bill Discounting holders.

Clearly Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd. is lying through its teeth and is attempting all legal tricks to drag this matter in Court. Further updates will follow.

Regarding Fund Raising

As you are all aware, I have been keeping you all updated without charges. This will continue no matter what. Ordinarily I would not address such an issue but there is some confusion which needs to be clarified.

There is some amount of confusion created on account of there being two groups of investors who are taking action against Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd. in Madras High Court. One group is headed by Vedanta Desikan, Nikhil Girme, Anita Sanghani, Mr. V. Meghani, Mr. Rishikesh Lakhotia, Mr. Dharam Gurnani amongst others. The other group is led by Mr. Rajnikant Mehta, Mr. Errol S. and Mrs. Neelan Shirsekar who were part of the original group but have decided to take parallel action by hiring another set of lawyers.

Both groups are trying to achieve the same objective, to get the hard earned money back. But there is confusion created because both groups are asking for fund collections from each of you. 

One group led by Mr. Vedanta Desikan had asked for a contribution of Rs. 500/- per head for meeting advertising expenses of the winding up order which is now not required. I am informed that this collection will continue for meeting future expenses for the legal costs incurred by this group, for creation of database of investors as well as for advertising expenses should Helios' appeal fail and should the Madras High Court reissue a winding up order. This group is looking at defending the appeal filed by Helios and at pursuing cases of fraud against Helios. The idea is to put pressure on Helios by threat of arrest in order to extract the money invested, either through a lump sum payment or through a scheme of repayment.

The other group led by Mr. Rajnikant Mehta has asked for contribution of Rs. 1000/- per head towards meeting legal costs for hiring a lawyer to help draft a scheme of repayment and provide legal representation for investors. It is not specified whether this is a one time cost or there could be scope for further contribution in the future. This group is looking at working with Helios to obtain refunds by agreeing to a scheme of repayment over few years.

Please note that I am not part of the fund collection exercise and am not siding with any one group. You may choose to give your funds to whichever group or both groups, but please do ensure that the money so given is accounted for and disbursed properly for purposes of furthering your cause.

From my end the updates will continue and whatever legal efforts I independently put in will remain free of charge.

Helios files Appeal against Winding Up Order - OSA 19/2016 and CMP 2253/2016 - Preliminary Information

Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd. has appealed against the Winding Up order issued by the single judge of the Madras High Court. The appeal lies before the Division Bench (two judges) of the Madras High Court.

We are informed that a stay order has been obtained. Details will follow.

There was a drive for collecting Rs. 500/- from investors to fund the advertisement costs of the winding up order. As Helios has appealed against the order, the  advertisement of the order is currently not necessary.

Winding Up Petition 143/2015 - Hearing Update (21/01/2016)

The matter was heard on Thursday 21/01/2016. The delay in this update was purely on account of the fact that an order had been passed but the same was not available with us and we did not want to speculate on the same.

The Madras High Court has ordered Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd. to be wound up. The order can be found by clicking on this link.

Brief synopsis of the order:

- Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd. has become commercially insolvent and is unable to clear dues.

- The Company has siphoned off funds and cannot be believed further.

- The Company is ordered to be wound up.

- Official Liquidator will be appointed to take over affairs of the Company so that monies which are realizable are not frittered away.

- The directors of the Company are to submit their statement of affairs to the official Liquidator.

- The Ministry of Corporate Affairs Serious Fraud Investigating Office is directed to investigate the Company. Report to be submitted to the Court before 18.03.2016. 

Observations in the order:

- The Company tried to drag the matter;

- The promises made (by the Company) were not kept up;

- The Company has not disclosed the full details regarding the source of funds. Nor the whereabouts of the deposits received is exposed;

- The Company attempted to deviate and confuse the entire issue by submitting a revised scheme which is clearly unworkable;

- The attitude reveals that the management has acted in a surreptitious manner so as to purchase breathing time to sell properties;

- The Company has no respect for Court orders and it has committed contempt of Court;

- There is no bona fide in the attitude of the Company;

- The management continues to indulge in prevarication;

 However the Court did not pass any observation remarking that the total deposits accepted are actually far greater than reported by Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd. Also the Court did not specify whether the interim order protecting the key personnel of the Company from arrest is vacated or not.

Implications of the order:

- The Company will be wound up.

- An independent person called the Official Liquidator is appointed. His duties are to investigate the failure of the Company in fulfilling its dues, obtain information on the statement of affairs of the Company from its management, to draw up a list of assets, surpluses, receivables, payables, creditors, debtors, etc., to take over the management and affairs of the Company and sell the assets and realize the debts for the purpose of distribution amongst the creditors of the Company.

- Any realizable monies will be first paid up to the Government if any dues exist towards revenue/taxes, then to the employees and other higher ranked payees.

- Then all the creditors will be ranked as per Companies Act, 2013 and distribution of proceeds will be made on basis of law.

- This process can take between 6 months to a year.

- If the MCA's SFIO finds a case of serious fraud, the directors could face jail time and penalties.

What we will do:

- Provide a complete list of depositors available with us to the Official Liquidator;

- Give the Official Liquidator information on subsidiaries of the Company and assets held by them;

- Obtain arrest of the directors of the Company for fraud;

- Resist any appeal by the Company which is likely to happen;

- Obtain clarity on the status of the interim order which permitted freedom from arrest for the key personnel of Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd.

Vote For or Against the Scheme of Repayment Proposed by Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd.

As you are aware we are at a crucial stage in the Winding Up case filed against Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd. We are faced with two scenarios:

a) Accept the scheme of repayment proposed by Helios (The same has not been submitted by way of affidavit and has not been seen by the judge to our knowledge. You can view the scheme here on this link)
or
b) Reject the scheme and await winding up or other orders that the judge may pass.

I am preparing the following write up of advantages and disadvantages of both aspects.

a) Accept the scheme of repayment proposed by Helios

Advantages

• 7 crores gets disbursed on an immediate basis to various investors (Mainly the small Fixed Deposit holders)
• In 3 years, if Helios keeps its promise, most Fixed Deposit holders may get paid only their principal amounts.

Disadvantages

• Many Fixed Deposit holders are not covered in the proposed scheme as it is based on the list of depositors submitted by Helios in court. This includes many Fixed Deposit holders whose Fixed Deposits have already matured.
• All Bill Discounting and Promissory Note holders are left out from the scheme.
• Scheme does not cover interest on the principal amounts.
• Scheme does not cover penal interest for delayed payments.
• Scheme does not mention any thing with respect to TDS already deducted and not credited and also has no mention of future TDS.
• Scheme does not mention from which date the 3 years begins.
• Scheme does not have any commitments with safeguards. There is no mention of what can be done if Helios does not comply with the scheme. For example Helios may default on the 1 year commitment and can state that they will still fulfill the same within 3 years deadline. This can lead to further delay in repayment.
• Scheme does not mention where the funds will be brought from for repayment.
• Scheme does not provide for security in case of default.
• If scheme is accepted, Helios directors will enjoy freedom from arrest till repayment is completed (minimum 3 years).
• Scheme also does not prohibit directors from withdrawing funds during the 3 year period for their own benefit either by way if dividend or salaries.
• There is no monitoring authority for this scheme who can verify compliance with this scheme.
• Scheme considers repayment on priority basis to small Fixed Deposit holders. It does not consider hardship cases and does not mention any committee for determining hardship cases.
• Scheme goes against the spirit of good faith as money accepted by Helios after 31.03.2014 is supposed to be illegally accepted and should be returned immediately as per law.
• Scheme is long stretched and can further delay the matter.
• Banks can interrupt this scheme by filing cases that they need to be paid first. On this basis also the scheme can fail.

b) Reject the scheme and await winding up

Advantages

• 7 crores get disbursed on basis of maturity of Fixed Deposits or on whatever basis the court deems equitable/charitable.
• Helios directors are permitted to be arrested by the EOW under the TNPID Act or for cheating if fraud can be established. This can put pressure on them for faster repayment than the scheme.
• HMIT gets wound up and Liquidator will be appointed who will take charge of the assets and receivables of HMIT, its subsidiaries in US and further subsidiaries. Together we estimate these companies to have a ready net worth of 70 crores.
• Every one of us gets covered, including Bill Discounting and Promissory Note holders and those Fixed Deposit holders who are not part of the list submitted by Helios to court.

Disadvantages

• Winding up means preparing a list of creditors and assets. Repayment happens first for the expenses of the Liquidators, then secured creditors, then trade creditors, then unsecured creditors. However we have been informed that most banks are unsecured creditors and will rank along side us. So many hands will be there to share the proceeds.
• If the directors do not mind getting jailed, then we cannot pressurize them to repay faster as anticipated.
• The procedure for identification and disbursement of assets can take up to a year.

What I request each one of you is to make up your mind and decide on whether you would like to accept the scheme or reject it and cast your vote by clicking on this form below. I will not influence your vote as you must decide for yourself.

Please note that you can vote only once and repeat votes will be disregarded. Your vote will be equal to your investment amount and proportionately we shall calculate against the total data received by us so far. For eg: Total data is of 50 crores. If you have invested 1 lakh your vote will be 0.05%. If you have invested 50 lakhs, your vote will be 1%. If you have invested 1 crore, your vote will be 2%.

Voting will remain open only till Sunday, i.e. 17.01.2016.