UBI had filed the SLP against the permission granted to the ailing company by the Appellate Authority Financial & Industrial Reconstruction to sell assets.

In a petition before the Calcutta high court last month against a March 12 order by the AAIFR, which stated that Dunlop has to keep in mind its creditors, the tyremaker claimed that the Supreme Court had vacated UBI's SLP.

However, according to a copy of the apex court's May 10 ruling, hearing was set for the third week of July.

When contacted by The Financial Express, Dunlop's spokesperson confirmed that the UBI case will be heard on July 16, contradicting its stand before the Calcutta high court.

In response to Dunlop's petition before the high court, counsel for Dunlop workers KH Dasanhad objected to the company's claim on the SLP, noting that there has been a "total suppression of material facts..."

According to Dunlop's 200-page application including annexures, UBI's SLP stands vacated. Dunlop, in its response to objections raised by Dasan in his affidavits, iterated that the SLP had been vacated and denied suppressing facts.

Para 34 of the company's application notes: "Your petitioners state that your petitioners have come to know that the Special Leave Petition filed by United Bank of India came up for hearing on the 10th day of May 1999 and the interim order operating against the petitioner company has been vacated."

The petition further said that: "Due to paucity of time it has not been possible to annex a copy of the order passed by the Supreme Court of India in the said Special Leave Petition filed by United Bank of India."

Para 19 of the same petition notes that the Supreme Court order on United Bank's SLP which came up for hearing on May 10, 1999, was annexed and markedas `G'.

In the May 10 order, the Supreme Court had restrained Dunlop from selling any assets. "While adjourning the hearing in this case to the third week of July this year, we direct that the interim directions contained in our dated 26th February, 1999 shall continue ...," the court had said.

In the February 26 order, Justices BN Kripal and SR Babu had noted: "The respondent-company is restrained from alienating any of its assets."

Dasan said that the company has contradicted its own statements in its petition. He pointed out that despite claiming that the case has been vacated, Dunlop annexed the Supreme Court's order of May 10, 1999.

Again, in para 34, the company has claimed that the United Bank's SLP which came up for hearing on May 10, 1999, has been vacated.

In his affidavit, Dasan has contended that: "...the same [statement in para 34] is wholly misconceived misleading and contrary to what has been stated at paragraph-19 of the said Writ Petition as well as Annexure-G appearing on Page-200of the same Writ Petition".

Venkatesan steps down from director's post

TS Venkatesan has stepped down as director of Dunlop India Ltd with effect from June 30 this year. Confirming his exit, the company's spokesperson said he retired from the MR Chhabria group. However, other sources disputed this, be saying that he had actually quit the company.

Venkatesan was brought to back into the Chabbria group of companies a couple of years ago. Initially, he had joined Shaw Wallace & Co Ltd and was also a director on the tyre-maker's board. Later, at a board reshuffle in December last year, he, along with the-then managing director PJ Rao, was asked to look after the revival of Dunlop India only.

The spokesperson said that Venkatesan offered to retire after his term expired.