- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
Karnataka High Court provides relief to Xiaomi
It allows the company to take an overdraft from its bank account for making the payments
The Karnataka High Court has extended the stay on the order of the Enforcement Directorate (ED) seizing Rs.5,551.27 crores from the bank accounts of Xiaomi Technology India till the next date of hearing.
In his order, Justice S Sunil Dutt Yadav stated, "The petitioner is at liberty to take the overdraft and make payments, excluding the royalty. It is a matter between the petitioner and the bank."
Appearing on behalf of Xiaomi, Senior Advocate S Ganesh argued that his client was being targeted because he was of Chinese origin.
Earlier, Justice Hemant Chandanagoudar had granted interim relief to Xiaomi against the order of the ED. it was passed on the ground that the Chinese technology company violated the provisions of the Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA).
Justice Chandanagoudar had stated that the money in the bank account blocked by the ED could be used for day-to-day expenses and payment of salaries to the employees.
But the court had now recorded the submission of the Additional Solicitor General that the ED would file an application for vacating the stay.
The judge observed that the request of the petitioner for a further interim order requires a detailed hearing. He said, "Due to paucity of time, the matter cannot be considered. It is adjourned to May 23."
Xiaomi was represented by Senior Advocates S Ganesh and Sajan Poovayya. They were instructed by AZB & Partners' led by Senior Partner Aditya Vikram Bhat.