MUMBAI: It was double victory for the BCCI which was basking in glory of the record title sponsorship deal signed by Pepsi for IPL. Kings XI Punjab (KXIP) has agreed to settle its legal disputes with India?s cricket board outside the court.

The BCCI resolved its dispute with Kings XI Punjab over alleged breach of franchisee agreements. The franchise owners have agreed to pay Rs 10 million for the breach of agreement.

According to reports, BCCI officials had met representatives of KXIP in Mumbai on Wednesday to find a middleground.

The BCCI had in 2010 terminated its franchise agreement with KXIP following which the franchise approached Bombay High Court challenging the decision.

A division bench of Bombay HC had upheld the injunction order passed by a single bench which saw the franchise being re-instated.

MUMBAI: Former Indian Premier league (IPL) chairman Lalit Modi has accused the Indian government of creating a false impression that he has been trying to evade questioning by authorities on financial transactions of IPL.

Modi has been staying in the UK since 14 May 2010, after the government launched a probe against IPL?s finances.

Modi, in a statement, said he was forced to leave the country when the security provided to him by the police was suddenly withdrawn. He also alleged that the establishment started hitting back at him with a vengeance after his disclosure about Sunanda Pushkar, then Shashi Tharoor?s fianc? and now wife, holding sweat equity in the Kochi franchise of IPL. The disclosure had led to the resignation of Tharoor, the then Minister of State for External Affairs. Tharoor was recently re-inducted as Minister of State for Human Resource Development.

"A series of investigations were started by income tax authorities and after some days I found that without any prior warning, the security cover was suddenly withdrawn leaving me and my family exposed to serious risk to life. I was, in these circumstances, left with no option but to move out of India on the morning of 14th May 2010. Before my security cover was withdrawn, I had co-operated completely with income tax authorities and given my detailed response to BCCI?s show cause notice," he said.

"At this point, the Enforcement Directorate was not even in the picture. The Enforcement Directorate issued its first summons to me on 2 August 2010 seeking certain documents pertaining to IPL contracts and asking me to attend their offices in person. All the documents sought were duly supplied by me. In view of the security risk to me in India I requested that I should answer any questions by way of an interrogatory questionnaire or appear on video link or get to be questioned in person in the Indian High Commission in the UK. These were all valid modes under the law for co-operating but the ED chose to ignore all of them."

Modi says the reports in the Indian press suggesting that the Ministry for External Affairs is requesting assistance from the UK authorities to enforce his return to India for questioning are based on innuendo and mis-information. "The intention is clearly to suggest I am avoiding official requests to co-operate and to give the perception that I therefore have something to hide. The truth of the matter is very different."

He said the tax enforcement wings of the Indian Government, namely Income Tax department and Enforcement Directorate (ED) acting under the provisions of Foreign Exchange Management Act (Fema) started making enquiries without any formal complaint.

"This created the perception that some contravention may have been committed. It resulted in a smoke screen of unsubstantiated and uncorroborated allegations from doctored and selective leaks to the media so that in the ensuing media trial, the objective and hard facts take a back seat. There is no power of arrest or custodial interrogation either under investigations taken under Income Tax Act or Fema and therefore requirement of physical presence can be dispensed with," Modi said.

"However, an impression was sought to be created as if some offence has been committed by me for which I need to be brought to - and questioned in - India. The ED and the Income Tax department come under the Ministry of Finance. For quite some time now I have been making public my views through Twitter regarding the impropriety of re-inducting Mr Shashi Tharoor. The timing of the demand to enforce my return (to India) needs to be viewed in that perspective."

Modi pointed out that along with him other BCCI officials were also party to the Show Cause notices issued by the ED.

"This is not true. The Show Cause notices issued by the ED in 2011 and 2012 were distributed to up to 10 recipients. These include the BCCI itself as well as individuals including current President, N. Srinivasan, S. Manohar, M. Pandove, R. Shetty. These recipients, like me, were officers of the BCCI at the time the investigation is focused upon. I am included in my capacity as IPL Chairman. However the fact that I had no financial powers is entirely ignored," Modi stated.

He also points to the suggestion that the Ministry of Finance wishes to pursue "issues" regarding his own financial transactions. He counters saying that the Show Cause Notices do not, at any point, indicate they are pursuing personal allegations against him individually.

"As a former Chairman of the IPL I have been asked to respond to information contained within the Show Cause Notices relating to the activities of the IPL, a tournament which is run under the auspices of the BCCI and governed by the BCCI accordingly. The IPL Committee has no independent jurisdiction and all matters relating to IPL finances and general conduct ultimately rest within the BCCI and are jointly controlled by the Treasurer and Secretary of the BCCI. My involvement in the investigation has been requested in order to assist the overall investigation. It is not an investigation into Lalit Modi."

He said that the Enforcement Directorate had issued four show cause notices and he has given detailed replies explaining his position. "All these notices state that I can appear through my representative - either a chartered accountant or a lawyer. However no date of any hearing has ever been given by the ED in the last two years.

"On 3rd September 2012, I presented my latest response to various Show Cause Notices in a letter to the Special Director of the Enforcement Directorate. This 46 page document and associated annexures, formed a preliminary reply that was provided to confirm to the authorities my full commitment to my co-operation. In the letter sent through my lawyers, we confirmed that we were prepared to provide an even more detailed response when in receipt of the important, additional documentation we had requested from the E.D. to aid our task of responding. These documents have never been received."

He adds that death threats, relating to any return to India, are still being made as were reported recently in a section of Pakistani media. "The Authorities are aware of the ongoing status of the threats and they have made it clear they cannot guarantee my personal safety or that of my family, if I were to return."

He adds that the revocation of his Passport is an arbitrary and unnecessary infringement of my personal rights and liberty. "It is an act I am challenging through the courts and is therefore sub judice."

MUMBAI: The Indian Premier League (IPL) is entering a new cycle of valuations. Just two bidders for a new IPL franchise and a comparatively low bid of Rs 4.25 billion by Sun TV Network for the Hyderabad team for five years doesn?t augur well for the world?s richest cricket property.

Some of the existing franchises wanting to exit or dilute stake are fearing that they would have to wait longer. The low price and absence of widespread interest in owning an IPL team has, indeed, dampened the prospects of some of the existing franchises selling stakes at higher valuations.

"If only two parties wanted to bid for a new franchise, then where will the interest in an existing franchise come from? If any of the current franchise owners wanted to exit or sell a stake at a high valuation, they should have done it earlier. That ship has now sailed," Dabur India director and co-owner of Kings XI Punjab IPL team Mohit Burman told Indiantelevision.com.

Incidentally, Kings XI Punjab, Rajasthan Royals and Shah Rukh Khan?s Kolkata Knight Riders are looking to sell stakes.

The IPL franchises were in general hoping to get good returns on their investments after the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) sold Pune and Kochi franchises at very high prices. The Kochi team, which now does not exist, was won with a bid of $333.3 million and the Pune team was bought for $370 million by Sahara group in 2010.

Some analysts had then pointed out that the winning bids for Kochi and Pune teams had defied business logic as many existing franchises were already finding it difficult to break-even save for the ones that were bought at lower prices.

Sun TV Network?s winning bid is less than half of what PVP Ventures had bid (Rs 9 billion) for Deccan Chargers just a month ago. Its bid is 23 per cent higher than that of PVP Ventures? current bid.

Sun Group?s S L Narayanan made this point loud and clear when he said, "The price we have paid is attractive because the last deal (for Pune team by Sahara) was almost at Rs 170 crore (Rs 1.7 billion) per annum. We have got it at about 50 per cent of that transaction."

Narayanan also said that the company has done its math well before taking the plunge in cricket business. "We have a fair understanding of what are the inflows and what are the expenses," he asserted.

Burman said the price paid for by Sun TV is good for them. "The fact that a reputable media company has come in will only help IPL grow. They are present in multiple media."

Brand Finance India MD Unni Krishnan is not surprised at the difference in price between what Sun TV paid now and what Sahara paid in 2010.

"Brand Finance is of the view that the IPL?s ecosystem?s long-term value has been steadily coming under pressure and is tracking back to its base value of $2 billion from the heights of $4 billion. Further the Deccan Chargers? team had come under a cloud due to misconduct and poor governance, in a sense mirroring a lot of ills which IPL as a whole faces! So the valuation is very much in keeping with the trends we see," he avers.

Asked if the price that Sun TV paid makes business sense, he said that it depends on what view Sun TV is taking. "If they believe, they can trade on this asset for a higher value in 2-3 years, they might be disappointed. If they are willing to set the house in order and work on the long-term value of the franchise it does make sense."

He, however, is not surprised that only two companies Sun TV and PVP Ventures bid. "Not surprising as stakeholders are becoming wary of the IPL brand and business model. The waning interest and valuation are strong signals that that the IPL brand and its long-term value are being eroded."

According to Group ESP Managing Partner Hiren Pandit, the fact that only two bids were received goes on to show the wariness about IPL as a business venture. "The fact that only two bids were received shows that corporates are wary about owning an IPL team," he says.

Pandit pointed out that Sun TV was in a better positioned to extract better sponsorship revenues by offering packaged deals that would include the television network owned by the channels. Sun would, however, have to deal with the challenge of gate receipts since Hyderabad is not a great ?ticket-revenue? market compared to Mumbai or Delhi.

BCCI president N Srinivasan is undeterred. He contends that Sun TV Network?s bid must be compared to what was being paid by Deccan Chronicle Holdings Limited (DCHL) for the Hyderabad franchise.

"This is twice the value of Deccan Chargers and if you take into account the sharing of central rights compared to the expansion of franchises (addition of Pune and Kochi) you will find that it represents higher value and it?s a very good value. More importantly, it?s a very credible franchise owner. I think they will add value to the league."

Srinivasan also said that the value of Hyderabad franchise shouldn?t be compared with the ones put in by Sahara Group for the Pune team. Reason: Sahara by virtue of being a late entrant and paying a higher franchise fee gets 80 per cent of revenue share from the central pool as compared to other franchises which get 60 per cent beginning with IPL season 5.

"The original eight franchises had a 10 year period and now five years are left. So after 10 years the arrangement is such that you don?t pay a franchise fee but you pay 20 per cent of the income so that it?s consistent for all. The Pune franchise gets 80 per cent of the income whereas from year five onwards other franchises get 60 per cent revenue. So there is difference in the income," he explained.

Also Read: Sun TV bags IPL franchise for Rs 850.5 mn a year

MUMBAI: Kalanithi Maran-owned media conglomerate Sun TV Network on Thursday won the Hyderabad Indian Premier League (IPL) franchise putting in the highest bid that was 23 per cent more than the second bid for the same team.

Sun bid Rs 850.5 million a year while the next bid was for Rs 690.3 million from PVP Ventures, which had earlier bid a whopping Rs 9.0 billion for buying the sacked, financially-distressed Hyderabad team Deccan Chargers.

The earlier Hyderabad franchise owned by Deccan Chronicle Holdings Ltd (DCHL) still had five years to go under the contract with Indian Premier League (IPL), when it failed to get a respite from both the Bombay High Court and the Supreme Court to get its termination stayed earlier this month.

Sun will get to own the franchise for a period of five years till 2017 paying Rs 4.25 billion as franchise fee to the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI).

When DCHL?s Deccan Chargers won the bid for its Hyderabad team in January 2008, it had committed to pay $107 million (Rs 4.21 billion) over a period of 10 years which worked out to $10.7 million (Rs 421 million) per year at the rupee-dollar exchange rate prevalent in January 2008.

From 2018, Sun will own the yet-to-be named franchise in perpetuity and will pay 20 per cent of the franchise revenue every year as fee to the BCCI.

According to an IPL Governing Council member, Sun TV has paid Rs 200 million as performance guarantee and Rs 850.5 million as bank guarantee for the 2013 when the company will make its IPL debut.

"Sun TV Network has won the Hyderabad Franchise for an amount of Rs 85.05 crores (Rs 855.5 million) per year. This Franchise fee represents a premium of over a 100 per cent above the amount paid by DCHL for the Hyderabad Franchise in 2008," BCCI secretary Sanjay Jagdale said in a statement.

"The Sun TV Network bid was substantially higher than the second bid of PVP Ventures, which was Rs 69.03 crores (Rs 690.3 million)," he added.

The IPL Governing Council met earlier today in Mumbai to open the bids for a new IPL Franchise. The BCCI had on 14 October invited bids for adding the ninth IPL team after the exit of Deccan Chargers and had opened up the bidding for any of the 10 cities including Ahmedabad, Vizag, Hyderabad and Noida. The response to the bidding was lukewarm as Sun TV and PVP Ventures were the only two bidders and both bid for Hyderabad.

Sun will also have the right to sign existing Deccan Chargers players. The players who are not signed by their existing franchises will go into the auction pool.

The franchises have to sign contracts with existing players before the 31 October deadline.

Also Read: New IPL valuation set by Sun TV to deter deals

MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court has quashed all hopes for cash-strapped Deccan Chronicles Holdings Limited (DCHL) by setting aside the status quo order passed by the arbitrator granting relief to its IPL team Deccan Chargers.

In a double whammy, the court had also refused to grant any interim relief to DCHL against termination of its franchise agreement by the BCCI. The Court said that the legality of the termination would be decided by the arbitrator.

With this order, Deccan Chargers termination from IPL stands as was the case on 12 October when the franchise had failed to furnish Rs 1 billion bank guarantee following which it was ousted from the season 6 of IPL.

Justice RD Dhanuka quashed the status quo order passed by the arbitrator after hearing a petition filed by the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI). While passing the order, Justice Dhanuka said that the arbitrator is not "superior" to the high court and cannot pass an order which overrides the high court?s direction.

"Arbitrator had no jurisdiction to grant status quo. On the same day (12 October), the high court had denied extension of time to DCHL to furnish Rs 100 crore (Rs 1 billion) bank guarantee as directed by the court on October 1," Justice Dhanuka said.

He also said that once the Court has rejected relief, the plea made before the arbitrator is not maintainable.

Justice Dhanuka also noted that the order passed by Justice SJ Kathwala on 1 October directing DCHL to furnish bank guarantee was "self operative and protective of the interests of both DCHL and BCCI".

He refused to grant any relief to DCHL since it has still not been able to furnish bank guarantee. "DCHL has still not furnished bank guarantee. Hence there is no change in circumstances to grant relief to DCHL. No case is made out for interim relief for granting stay on termination. The application seeking stay is a gross abuse of law," Justice Dhanuka said.

The DCHL had on Wednesday requested the court to grant relief contending that the termination of Deccan Chargers was not anybody?s interest whether it is owners, players or lenders. It also pointed out that DCHL has till now invested Rs 6 billion in the franchise.

Retired Supreme Court Judge C K Thakkar, who was last month appointed as the arbitrator, had passed an order last week directing BCCI not to go ahead with its termination of Deccan Chargers following which the BCCI challenged the order in High Court and secured a stay.

Backed by its lenders, DCHL had said that it was ready to furnish bank guarantee by 9 October as directed by the court on 1 October. However, it could not furnish bank guarantee by the designated time following which the court granted it three more days to furnish the amount.

Despite extension of deadline, DCHL was unable to furnish irrevocable and unconditional bank guarantee of Rs 1 billion by 12 October which led to its termination from the IPL after the court refused to grant more time to DCHL to furnish bank guarantee.

The Court had said in its 1 October order that the BCCI?s termination notice would stand if DCHL fails to furnish bank guarantee. The interim relief provided by the arbitrator also proved short lived as the court stayed the status quo order passed by the arbitrator extending deadline for submitting bank guarantee.

With termination notice standing, the DCHL?s attempt to sell the franchise to Mumbai-based real estate firm Kamla Landmarc proved a non-starter. Kamla Landmarc is believed to have committed Rs 12.5 billion for acquiring the franchise.

The DCHL plea comes on a day when IPL Governing Council is meeting in Mumbai to discuss the termination of Deccan Chargers and the fate of the players since 31 October is the deadline for resigning players.

Earlier, the BCCI had floated tenders for a new franchise after terminating Deccan Chargers.The tender notice for a fresh franchise invites bids in respect of 12 cities including Ahmedabad, Cuttack, Dharamsala, Indore, Kanpur, Kochi, Nagpur, Noida, Rajkot, Ranchi, Hyderabad and Visakhapatnam.