Venky’s v Indian Government (a) - 5/8/2025 - Post-Season Friendly (s/t late postponements)

[Forever Blue]

So there’s still no impediment, just a choice about if/when they send money. 

[lraC]

39 minutes ago, Forever Blue said:

So there’s still no impediment, just a choice about if/when they send money. 

I really don't think you understand the meaning of the word impediment.

If they could send funds with no, affidavit, no bond and no court permission, they there would be no impediment, but all 3 of these exists.

They can send funds, so long as these 3 conditions (Impediments) are met.

[Tomphil2]

Previous to the court case they sent money when it was needed or when they felt like it but now they have to ask first and follow a set of rules laid out by the court, if they don't then they can't.

Therefore there is an impediment.

[wilsdenrover]

Just in case anyone is interested (oh and hello Elliott 🙋‍♂️😁)

During the course of the court proceedings the Venkys attorney has filed 5 affidavits.

The first was on the 20th June 2023 and I believe was in relation to them setting out their initial case for funds to be sent.

The second was on the 15th November 2023 - 15 days after a court order gave them permission to send £11 million (subject, amongst other things, to such an affidavit being lodged confirming the intended use of the funds)

The third was on the 2nd January 2024 - I cannot explain this one.

The fourth was on the 11th March 2024 - just one day before a No Objection Certificate was issued (without a court date but presumably in light of the Venkys meeting the court’s conditions, including the filing of an affidavit).

The final one was on the 16th June - 21 days after the court agreed to funds being sent with the bond reduced (but the affidavit requirement remaining).

Anyone still reading??😁

In relation  to the allotting of shares with regards to these monies…

The first sum authorised by the court (before the requirement to file an affidavit was added) was £3.54 million on the 23rd June 2023.

On 14th October 2024 £3.685 million of shares were allotted in Venkateshwara London a limited (the company which owns the training ground).

The second sum authorised by the court was on 31st October 2023 for £11 Million.

On the 19th March 2024 £11 million of shares were allotted in Venkys London Limited.

I believe, but clearly can’t be certain, these two payments and share allotments are related.

That would leave the £15 million from March 2024 and the more recent £4.85 million to be turned into shares at some stage**

** or perhaps it could be left as a debt owed by Venkys London to Venkys Hatcheries but I consider this unlikely.

Well done to anyone who got this far 😁😁- I’m more than happy for people to point out where any assumptions I’ve made are (or could be) incorrect.

 

 

 

Edited 6 hours ago by wilsdenrover

[wilsdenrover]

1 hour ago, Forever Blue said:

So there’s still no impediment, just a choice about if/when they send money. 

 

46 minutes ago, lraC said:

I really don't think you understand the meaning of the word impediment.

If they could send funds with no, affidavit, no bond and no court permission, they there would be no impediment, but all 3 of these exists.

They can send funds, so long as these 3 conditions (Impediments) are met.

I can see where @Forever Blue is coming from with this because, whilst there are restrictions, it is not outside of Venky’s’ control to meet them.

Yes they’ve hoops to jump through but it is entirely within their hands as to whether they do so or not.

Re the court permission, for reasons I’ve set out before, I don’t think they need this anymore unless they’re wanting to try and get the conditions changed as well.

Edited 6 hours ago by wilsdenrover

[lraC]

3 minutes ago, wilsdenrover said:

 

I can see where @Forever Blue is coming from with this because, whilst there are restrictions, it is not outside of Venky’s’ control to meet them.

Yes they’ve hoops to jump through but it is entirely within their hands as to whether they do so or not.

Re the court permission, for reasons I’ve set out before, I don’t think they need this anymore unless they’re wanting the conditions that let them do so to be changed. 

I can see where he is coming from too, but as most posters know, impediment is just another word for conditions and as most also know there are conditions to be met. Yes they can meet them and send the funds, but it does not mean that they don’t exist. 

[lraC]

23 minutes ago, wilsdenrover said:

Just in case anyone is interested (oh and hello Elliott 🙋‍♂️😁)

During the course of the court proceedings the Venkys attorney has filed 5 affidavits.

The first was on the 20th June 2023 and I believe was in relation to them setting out their initial case for funds to be sent.

The second was on the 15th November 2023 - 15 days after a court order gave them permission to send £11 million (subject, amongst other things, to such an affidavit being lodged confirming the intended use of the funds)

The third was on the 2nd January 2024 - I cannot explain this one.

The fourth was on the 11th March 2024 - just one day before a No Objection Certificate was issued (without a court date but presumably in light of the Venkys meeting the court’s conditions, including the filing of an affidavit).

The final one was on the 16th June - 21 days after the court agreed to funds being sent with the bond reduced (but the affidavit requirement remaining).

Anyone still reading??😁

In relation  to the allotting on shares with regards to these monies…

The first sum authorised by the court (before the requirement to file an affidavit was added) was £3.54 million on the 23rd June 2023.

On 14th October 2024 £3.685 million of shares were allotted in Venkateshwara London a limited (the company which owns the training ground).

The second sum authorised by the court was on 31st October 2023 for £11 Million.

On the 19th March 2024 £11 million of shares were allotted in Venkys London Limited.

I believe, but clearly can’t be certain, these two payments and share allotments are related.

That would leave the £15 million from March 2024 and the more recent £4.85 million to be turned into shares at some stage**

** or perhaps it could be left as a debt owed by Venkys London to Venkys Hatcheries but I consider this unlikely.

Well done to anyone who got this far 😁😁- I’m more than happy for people to point out where any assumptions I’ve made are (or could be) incorrect.

 

 

 

Not hard to read. It’s a well articulated post and thanks for making it.

[wilsdenrover]

3 minutes ago, lraC said:

I can see where he is coming from too, but as most posters know, impediment is just another word for conditions and as most also know there are conditions to be met. Yes they can meet them and send the funds, but it does not mean that they don’t exist. 

It’s all semantics really isn’t it.

I think the important thing is they shouldn’t be allowed to use these hindrances as an excuse for not funding the club properly.

Yes, as you say, they exist, but no they do not prevent them from fulfilling their obligations to the club.

If they don’t want to do this properly they should just fuck off.

[TugaysMarlboro]

Whichever side of the fence you sit on, the outcome is no investment in the squad from the owners. I think we can universally agree on that.

[lraC]

8 minutes ago, wilsdenrover said:

It’s all semantics really isn’t it.

I think the important thing is they shouldn’t be allowed to use these hindrances as an excuse for not funding the club properly.

Yes, as you say, they exist, but no they do not prevent them from fulfilling their obligations to the club.

If they don’t want to do this properly they should just fuck off.

Absolutely 

[Forever Blue]

1 hour ago, lraC said:

I really don't think you understand the meaning of the word impediment.

If they could send funds with no, affidavit, no bond and no court permission, they there would be no impediment, but all 3 of these exists.

They can send funds, so long as these 3 conditions (Impediments) are met.

There’s an irony in you telling me that I don’t know what an impediment is, then telling me it’s a ‘condition’🥹 

An impediment is a serious obstruction to doing something. That’s a literal definition. There is no serious obstruction to Venky’s sending Rovers money, just a choice. 
 

So when Waggott said there were no impediments, he was right. There are just ‘conditions’ that Venky’s have to agree to, which are in no way onerous. 
 

So as I’ve always said, it is Venkys choice whether they send the money. There is no impediment, legal or otherwise. 

[Forever Blue]

59 minutes ago, wilsdenrover said:

It’s all semantics really isn’t it.

I think the important thing is they shouldn’t be allowed to use these hindrances as an excuse for not funding the club properly.

Yes, as you say, they exist, but no they do not prevent them from fulfilling their obligations to the club.

If they don’t want to do this properly they should just fuck off.

Absolutely it is semantics,  but for some reason it’s an obsession for IraC. This thread is littered with him trying to score points on the back of that word. It’s strange behaviour, not least because saying there’s a genuine impediment gives Venky’s an excuse for not funding the club and instead selling all the best players to keep the lights on. 
 

Very odd. 

[Upside Down]

I'm happy to let forever blue and rev die on that hill.

They got taken for mugs by believing the words put out by waggot and the club and aren't man enough to concede their position.

I'm wondering if this ongoing court case is actually in relation to the first attempt to send over ~£20million that they were initially denied by the ED. So far it's been circa £3.6, £11.8 and now £4.5 million that's been sent over, all with full receipts for where it went.

Could it be that the other £15 million was deemed a separate item and they simply met the conditions imposed by the courts and ED? This came right after the house was sold also.

[den]

So is there also an impediment to investing anything at all into the playing squad? If Venkys “wanted” to give the manager - say £5m  for players, would they now have to also give a £2.5m guarantee to the courts?

[Upside Down]

2 minutes ago, den said:

So is there also an impediment to investing anything at all into the playing squad? If Venkys “wanted” to give the manager - say £5m  for players, would they now have to also give a £2.5m guarantee to the courts?

The bond is given to the ED. 

The same Enforcement Directorate that have a 95% success rate in their cases.

[Forever Blue]

27 minutes ago, Upside Down said:

I'm happy to let forever blue and rev die on that hill.

They got taken for mugs by believing the words put out by waggot and the club and aren't man enough to concede their position.

I'm wondering if this ongoing court case is actually in relation to the first attempt to send over ~£20million that they were initially denied by the ED. So far it's been circa £3.6, £11.8 and now £4.5 million that's been sent over, all with full receipts for where it went.

Could it be that the other £15 million was deemed a separate item and they simply met the conditions imposed by the courts and ED? This came right after the house was sold also.

Taken for mugs 🤣 are you going to ‘feed me a length’ again. 
 

Don’t forget to update your timeline, that’ll  show ‘em 🤣

[Upside Down]

5 minutes ago, Forever Blue said:

Taken for mugs 🤣 are you going to ‘feed me a length’ again. 
 

Don’t forget to update your timeline, that’ll  show ‘em 🤣

Well it shows every major event that happened since 2021. It's designed to be a resource for people who want to understand what has been happening. It took a lot of time and effort to put together and required reading and re reading court and legal documents hence the reason I have a decent understanding of the situation.

I wasn't personally feeding you a length btw. However, since comprehension of the English language is not something you appear to be particularly adept at I'm not surprised that you've misunderstood what I was saying.

[wilsdenrover]

46 minutes ago, Upside Down said:

I'm happy to let forever blue and rev die on that hill.

They got taken for mugs by believing the words put out by waggot and the club and aren't man enough to concede their position.

I'm wondering if this ongoing court case is actually in relation to the first attempt to send over ~£20million that they were initially denied by the ED. So far it's been circa £3.6, £11.8 and now £4.5 million that's been sent over, all with full receipts for where it went.

Could it be that the other £15 million was deemed a separate item and they simply met the conditions imposed by the courts and ED? This came right after the house was sold also.

The original writ petition by the Venky’s was, as you said, in relation to not being allowed to send £26 million.

This writ is yet to be fully resolved (I know right!!) what has happened in the meantime is:

In June ‘23 the judge allowed the circa £3.6 million to be sent across as an interim measure.

The Venky’s have made separate applications (a case within a case if you like) to:

*  be able to send £11 million across (heard and approved 31/10/23)

* be able to send monies without the need for a guarantee (first of many adjournments 23/9/24 - currently listed for 5th August)

* be able to send £4.85 million across (heard and approved 26/5/25)

Hope that helps.

 

Edited 1 hour ago by wilsdenrover
Reworded for clarity

[Upside Down]

1 minute ago, wilsdenrover said:

The original writ petition by the Venky’s was, as you said, in relation to not being allowed to send £26 million.

This writ is yet to be heard (I know right!!) what has happened in the meantime is:

In June ‘23 the judge allowed the circa £3.6 million to be sent across as an interim measure pending the original writ being heard.

The Venky’s have made separate applications (a case within a case if you like) to:

*  be able to send £11 million across (heard and approved 31/10/23)

* be able to send monies without the need for a guarantee (first of many adjournments 23/9/24 - currently listed for 5th August)

* be able to send £4.85 million across (heard and approved 26/5/25)

Hope that helps.

 

Makes sense 👍 

[Forever Blue]

4 minutes ago, Upside Down said:

Well it shows every major event that happened since 2021. It's designed to be a resource for people who want to understand what has been happening. It took a lot of time and effort to put together and required reading and re reading court and legal documents hence the reason I have a decent understanding of the situation.

I wasn't personally feeding you a length btw. However, since comprehension of the English language is not something you appear to be particularly adept at I'm not surprised that you've misunderstood what I was saying.

I’m fine with the English, I’m not ok with being threatened on a forum. Think on mouth. 

[Upside Down]

3 minutes ago, Forever Blue said:

I’m fine with the English, I’m not ok with being threatened on a forum. Think on mouth. 

You're clearly not fine with English if you for some reason think you've been threatened. 

Start with fuzz buzz and work your way up from there son 👍 

[wilsdenrover]

31 minutes ago, den said:

So is there also an impediment to investing anything at all into the playing squad? If Venkys “wanted” to give the manager - say £5m  for players, would they now have to also give a £2.5m guarantee to the courts?

It would appear that the Venkys and the Directorate of Endorcement have done a deal where the DE will issue the no objection certificate so long as the Venkys meet all the conditions previously imposed by the court.

Whether this deal (assuming it exists - I’m basing this on the certificate which was issued March ‘24 without a court case) includes the DE okaying funds being sent for transfers is anyone’s guess (although I believe most would think not).

If it does, then yes, this would include Venkys having to give the £2.5 million (in your example) to the ED  by way of a guarantee. 

 

Edited 1 hour ago by wilsdenrover

[Forever Blue]

1 minute ago, Upside Down said:

You're clearly not fine with English if you for some reason think you've been threatened. 

Start with fuzz buzz and work your way up from there son 👍 

No worries. Don’t forget to let everyone know when they can next invade the pitch at Ewood.🤣 You can watch it on TV from New Zealand whilst updating your timeline. 

 

[Upside Down]

3 minutes ago, Forever Blue said:

No worries. Don’t forget to let everyone know when they can next invade the pitch at Ewood.🤣 You can watch it on TV from New Zealand whilst updating your timeline. 

 

You'll not be far from NZ pretty soon with how deep that hole your digging is getting.

I never suggested invading the pitch, I said the games needed to be disrupted. 

Still not getting any better with that English comprehension there are we.

[Forever Blue]

1 minute ago, Upside Down said:

You'll not be far from NZ pretty soon with how deep that hole your digging is getting.

I never suggested invading the pitch, I said the games needed to be disrupted. 

Still not getting any better with that English comprehension there are we.

That’s brave of you sorting that ‘disruption’ out from NZ. You’re an inspiration. Thanks for your efforts🤣