UpHealth Appeals To U.S. States Court Against Overturning Of Arbitral Award In Glocal Dispute

The former Chairperson of Securities and Exchange Board of India, Meleveetil Damodaran, is facing an appeal against the order of a lower court filed by the American healthcare company UpHealth Holdings Inc. in the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.

The appeal follows a U.S. district court overturning a $25 million arbitral award against Damodaran, which had been issued by an Arbitral Tribunal in Chicago. This award was part of a larger damages ruling exceeding $110 million in favour of UpHealth, arising from a dispute linked to a share purchase agreement involving UpHealth, Glocal, and several shareholders, including Damodaran.

M. Damodaran held the top job at SEBI between 2005 and 2008.

The case at hand stems from allegations of financial mismanagement within Glocal Healthcare. While the proceedings in the USA are ongoing, the Calcutta High Court has frozen the bank accounts of Glocal's key board members. However the order to freeze the accounts does not apply to Damodaran.

Meanwhile, the Calcutta High Court has ordered two board members of Glocal Healthcare, Dr. Syed Sabahat Azim and his wife Richa Azim, to stop using or transferring any money from their bank accounts in Dubai and Turkey. Earlier this year, the court had asked them to reveal all their assets, but they failed to mention their accounts in those countries.

The court found this failure to disclose important information concerning their finances unacceptable.

The issue began when UpHealth acquired shares of Glocal from its shareholders including Damodaran. Subsequent conflicts over control of Glocal led UpHealth to initiate arbitration proceedings in 2022, alleging breaches of contract by Glocal’s directors and shareholders.

The Arbitral Tribunal held Glocal and its board, including Damodaran, liable for the claims and awarded UpHealth a total of $110 million, with $25 million specifically attributed to Damodaran. The former SEBI chief has challenged this ruling.

He had submitted that there is insufficient evidence connecting him to the key allegations, particularly regarding his participation in a crucial Extraordinary General Meeting that relates to the alleged breach.