The government will resist any legal attempt by former Ceylinco Chief Lalith Kotelawala and ex- directors of the failed Golden Key (GK) company to recover their assets seized on Supreme Court orders. Finance Minister Ravi Karunanayake told a media conference in Colombo on Monday that several depositors expressed their concerns against plans by former GK [...]

The Sunday Times Sri Lanka

Government opposes any legal attempt by Kotelawala in GK issue

View(s):

The government will resist any legal attempt by former Ceylinco Chief Lalith Kotelawala and ex- directors of the failed Golden Key (GK) company to recover their assets seized on Supreme Court orders.

Finance Minister Ravi Karunanayake told a media conference in Colombo on Monday that several depositors expressed their concerns against plans by former GK directors including Kotelawala to file motions in the Supreme Court urging the judiciary to release all their personal assets seized on court orders since 2010.

Mr. Kotelawala filed a motion in the Supreme Court (SC) last week urging the judiciary to release all his personal assets seized on court orders, counsel appearing for depositors, said.

Minister Karunanayake said such legal action will be opposed by the government. The Government plans to acquire GK assets with the consent of the Supreme Court with some assets being already identified.

He noted that depositors would be settled in cash. Many depositors at a meeting in the Finance Ministry recently reached agreement to withdraw their legal action in the Supreme Court if the Central Bank takes over the repayment process.

However depositors have demanded a written undertaking on the repayment plan approved by the Monetary Board before withdrawing their cases. Their FR cases are to be called in court on June 4.

GK depositors in two minds on withdrawing court cases 

Depositors of the collapsed GK Company are in two minds regarding the withdrawal of their cases filed at the Supreme Court, High Court, Colombo Commercial Court and Magistrate Courts when a related FR case resumes hearing on June 4.

Hejas Hisbullah, counsel for the depositors told the Supreme Court, last week that the cases filed by 29 aggrieved petitioners cannot be withdrawn without an assurance that a repayment plan acceptable to all is presented to court by the Monetary Board of the Central Bank (CB).
Deputy Solicitor General Viraj Dayaratne appearing for the CB told the court that the CB will conduct a due diligent audit on assets and liabilities of GK and take necessary steps to repay the money of depositors.

He noted that the time-bound repayment plan would be formulated and it will be brought to the notice of the court.

“We welcomed the undertaking of the government to settle depositors and should be done within a legal framework”, Dushanthi Hapugoda, a Director of the state-managed GK Company who is also the GK All Depositors’ Association President told the Business Times.

As per repayments to depositors, a total of Rs.2.59 billion was paid in four phases of Rs.100,000 each during the 2010-2014 period, she disclosed. A sum of Rs. 800.42 million was repaid to 8,143 depositors and Rs. 686.24 million to 7,060 depositors under the former Lakshman R. Watawala Committee.

The newly appointed GK board of directors took measures to repay Rs. 562.45 million to 6,894 depositors, and Rs. 10.57 million to 465 depositors with deposits below Rs. 1 million each.

After obtaining permission from the court, depositor Marco Perera told the judges that Ms. Hapugoda was responsible for many allegedly malpractices in the GK assets transactions.

He said that many manipulations were possible due to several parties including Ms. Hapugoda and petitioner Roshan Fernando misleading the courts to achieve their own objectives fraudulently.

He also produced documents where Ceylinco Insurance has volunteered to pay Rs. 2.1 billion to the depositors as an ex gratis payment as a settlement which was turned down by Ms. Hapugoda as she wanted to somehow give the shares to the second largest shareholder- for which she had allegedly negotiated a commission.

Ms. Hapugoda noted that she was not given an opportunity to reply this baseless allegation at the Supreme Court.

Mr. Perera’s intention was to bring disrepute to her in front of depositors, she said.

Advertising Rates

Please contact the advertising office on 011 - 2479521 for the advertising rates.