Why Subhiksha Trading Services collapsedIn January 2009, around the time that Satyam Computer Services was collapsing in a heap, Subhiksha too was falling to pieces. In all the noise generated by Satyam's crash, India's biggest discount retailer's downfall was muffled , heard merely as a whisper. But for Mukand, one of Subhiksha's 15,000 employees and a purchase manager for Karnataka, the noise was deafening. "We had no money, no work, nothing ," he says, recalling the fear and despondency among the staff of Subhiksha, which was regarded as a company that had found the magic formula to make organised retailing a success in India. Rumours that Subhiksha was in a precarious position started in September 2008 itself. That month, Mukand and his colleagues didn't get their salaries. A month later, the shops, there were 2,000 of them across India--started shutting, one by one. In early 2009, Mukand was given a salary cheque for 14,000. A few days later, he learnt that it was dishonoured. There was no money in the HSBC and Standard Chartered accounts of Subhiksha, a company which had just the previous year claimed sales of Rs 2,300 crore. When Subhiksha toppled over and sought restructuring of its loans, the world was in the middle of its biggest economic downturn since the 1930s. The company claimed that its entire inventory was looted by miscreants and spiteful employees, and projected itself as a victim of circumstances. In those tough times, the story was not difficult to believe but what surprised many was the sudden outbreak of animosity between ICICI Venture, India's largest domestic private equity firm, and Premji Invest. Premji purchased 10% in Subhiksha from ICICI Venture in March 2008 for Rs 230 crore in hopes of selling the shares for a handsome profit when the promised listing happened. He was left holding dud stock. To Premji and his team, handpicked from places like Hindustan Unilever and Bank of America, it was a humiliation. In January 2009, Renuka Ramnath, the chief executive of ICICI Venture, resigned. Visakha Mulye. The sudden collapse of a well-known retailer and the disappearance of bank money worth Rs 800 crore was extremely suspicious. along with Ramnath. it was not easy to move on. and how did he manage to win and lose everybody's trust so quickly? By then. the founder of Subhikhsa. Ramnath moved on to set up another private equity firm called Multiples Asset Management. took over and set about repairing the damage to the firm's image . In Bangalore at Premji Invest.So did Bala Deshpande who. CFO of ICICI Bank. was on the board of Subhiksha. they had discovered that one of . How did they get into this mess? Did IVen mislead them or were they done in by circumstances beyond their control ? Who exactly was R Subramanian. somebody else was working on the same issue. In their April 2010 report. the auditor. Subhiksha appeared to be a case of gigantic . including that he should be given access to the statements and reports that ET has in its possession. systematic fraud with the board turning a blind eye or being simply ignorant. Subhiksha was linked by the investigators to at least 42 shell companies which it suspects were used to route bank money. which lent money without proper checks and balances. Did Deloitte wash its hands off the crisis after realising that it could not explain the murky accounting? Or was it sidelined by Subramanian. the investigators make a litany of charges against Subhiksha: paper companies were set up to manipulate accounts and siphon money. Deloitte was reappointed by Subhiksha shareholders . was banned twice by Sebi from accessing the capital markets after being found guilty of irregularities in share allotments of two public issues. the registrar of companies (Roc) started probing. A Deloitte spokesperson said the firm was bound by confidentiality rules and that they had not done any audit as they had not received any financial statements after March 2007. some so serious that they felt that Serious Frauds Investigative Office had to be involved. The annual 2007/08 audit was undertaken by another Chennaibased firm. transactions with related parties were not disclosed .Subramanian's firms. investigators S Meenakshi and BAMP Rathnaswami uncovered some startling details. but in the latter half of 2008. Very soon. There were numerous violations. The paper declined to accept his conditions. In Chennai. As reports emerged about Subhiksha not paying PF dues and salaries. Vishwapriya. Subhiksha. was breaking rules regularly. It stopped auditing the accounts after April-June 2007 for some unfathomable reason. of which ET has a copy. . and the board just did not do its job. The case of Deloitte almost beggars belief. they found. who found its questions on the issue uncomfortable ? Subramanian set a number of conditions for answering questions. Tamil Nadu's capital. and calls for an SFIO investigation. leaving the matter in a limbo. But it did not get an appointment letter . the report says. completed the mess. Help was to come from an unexpected quarter. ROC INVESTIGATES Deep within the labyrinth of the Shastri Bhawan complex in Chennai are the headquarters of the southern region of the ministry of corporate affairs . Private equity greed and reckless behaviour by banks. The report also raises questions about the role played by Deloitte Haskins & Sells. .Another eight companies also appear to have been floated by Subramanian. All capital expenditure was undertaken by it but there is no record of any board resolution or approval given by the board. Hence directors are working in a manner prejudicial to the interest of the company. All the companies are linked to each other by common shareholders and all of them hold shares in other companies. other cases are more blatant. A copy of the legal opinion has not been shared with the investigators. ". the investigators found that for a few months beginning October 2006. the report says. profits and inventory in order to give the impression of growth. There is diversion of huge funds of the company each month from the month of October 2006 to March 2007 to City Capital Foundation. was retaining all credit card sales collections of Subhiksha and depositing it with the company only towards the end of the month. City Capital. The investigators also said Subramanian has declared interest in 13 companies but has maintained that they are not related parties. share premium of 5 lakh and investments of 5 lakh in each other. linked to Subramanian." In another instance. While most of the diversion seems to have happened through circular banking transactions.. For instance . All these companies have either common directors. A director told ET that this matter was never discussed or brought to the notice of the board. Loans for more than Rs 600 crore were taken without a full discussion or approval from the board.. Stone N Sand Builders. raising the question how banks allowed this to happen. forming a complex matrix making it difficult to unravel who is ultimately controlling the company ." the report says. There is heavy manipulation in the accounts of the company. a company in which Subramanian has declared interest. former chief justice. Subhiksha buys most of its grocery items from these companies and Subramanian has claimed he has secured an opinion from justice VN Khare. for instance." the investigators wrote. was asked in April 2005 to set up all shops outside the state of Tamil Nadu.. that they are not related parties . common shareholder or share addresses. "It seems that no amount was received by any of these three companies towards share capital and share premium and no amount was paid by any of these three companies towards investments in these companies and possibly there may be only book entries. City Capital Foundation. are linked together by common directors and common investments. which is a very serious matter.. Sun N Sand Tours and Shevaroy Holiday Resorts all have a share capital of 5 lakh.. Three more companies.. "It is felt that these examples are only tip of the iceberg. Investigators have reason to believe that Subramanian diverted bank funds to many of these shell companies and hid the fact by inflating Subhiksha revenue. Having invested Rs 230 crore for a minority stake without a board seat. Navroz Udwadia of Eton Park International . appoint a CFO and ask the company to finalise the accounts for the period to June 2008 before December. dismissing the firm's pleas that they were misled and kept in the dark by Subhiksha.92 crore only as per the audited balance sheet as of March 31. the amount of money due and the loans. they could only watch helplessly as their plans unravelled. Its failure had as much to do with her and IVen's lack of oversight as with Subramanian's financial manoeuvring. First they were told in May 2008 that the IPO was off. They cannot really feign ignorance of what was happening in the company in the transferor company except by coming up with a confession that such nominee directors failed to perform their duties and obligations. It lasted one full day and Subramanian was questioned in detail about the discrepancies in the company's accounts. was not even worth Rs 50 crore. The survey team returned a few days later. In the end. IVen's Ramnath had discovered something alarming in the accounts. a huge figure for any retail company. it was a bitter end to what promised to be a great investment . 2008. Replying to a mail by IVen's Sanjay Mehrotra on September 4. making a cool profit. The inventory position in July-September was Rs 660 crore."It is astonishing as to how all these banks sanctioned such huge loans when the company had fixed assets of Rs 188. KPMG. The inventory.. the board decided to take control: appoint KPMG to do a detailed audit. she asked a team of IVen investigators to inspect all Subhiksha warehouses for an independent survey. the directors of Subhiksha gathered for a crucial board meeting. Third. Renuka Ramnath did not reply officially to an email on the issue but she has defended herself within ICICI saying that she was a non-executive director and therefore did not about everything that was happening in the company. "Therefore. her firm sent out numerous missives to overseas and domestic funds about a possible investment in Subhiksha . One of her jobs as an investor was to put some trust in the management . she adds. Audited accounts for 2008 were not finalised and no CFO was appointed. the company did not comply. 2008. A list of funds who were contacted and their response is a part of a judgement given by Justice V Ramasubramanian J of the Madras High Court in one of the many cases relating to Subhiksha. IVen was looking for foreign investors to bail the company (Subhiksha) out of the woods. While all this was happening. A few weeks before. until she discovered that too many things were going wrong. WAS PREMJI HANDED A LEMON ? Between July and September 2008. According to Bijapurkar (a detailed account given by her on behalf of all the directors was submitted to the RoC by advocates Manilal Kher Ahmed & Co). the IVen nominees resigned." the judge said. A furious Bobby Mustafa confronted Ramnath but was told that IVen had given a similar loan in September of that year to bail the company out of a cash crunch. London said that while they were excited about a business model they were not willing to throw "stupid money around" ." On November 22. Auditors from Deloitte were called in and they made the startling disclosure that no appointment letter had been issued by Subhiksha. according to them. 2007 which was only available from September 2007. Taken aback. One by one. For Ramnath. The seemingly fast-growing and high-performing Subhiksha appeared ... Subhiksha should have done an IPO by early 2008 and her company could have exited. The board meet itself was stormy. Then they were asked to sign off a dubious reverse merger scheme to get the company listed. Premji Invest officials were on pins and needles.38 crore and inventories of Rs 363. it is clear that even upto September 2008. which she did.. was not allowed to do the audit. Subramanian refused to consider it a formal one and Rama Bijapurkar chaired it. Subramanian protested loudly but was overruled. they were asked to lend some money in December 2008. prior to our investment . where was the question of pre-IPO placement? The dossier and Rajendran's meeting with ICICI Venture in 2007 is also evidence.. We also learnt that in 2007. After Subhiksha shut shop. the last date for Subhiksha's draft red herring prospectus to be cleared and filed with Sebi." it said. If the lawyers had not signed off on the IPO. We were constantly told that the transaction needed to be completed urgently as an IPO was imminent .. One was a three-way conversation on December 31. A couple of years later. he approached R Subramanian for a loan. But a police investigation failed to corroborate the charges. Subramanian claims that his information was illegally obtained by hacking and has filed an FIR with the Chennai police. An enraged Rajendran decided to get even and undertook painstaking work to compile a dossier on Subramanian's alleged misdeeds. No action was taken. according to Premji Invest. However. "He once told me that he has read all the law there is to read and that there is nothing more to learn. the Subhiksha episode exposes the Indian regulatory and banking system's deep vulnerability . a whistleblower made disclosures of serious issues to ICICI Venture and Deloitte.to be in full meltdown mode before their eyes. Amarchand Mangaldas had not signed off on the DRHP in the form that it was made available to us. The loan was granted in return for which Rajendran pledged his land and shares in his company Citrex Products. Premji Invest officials looking for evidence of wrong-doing were tipped off and linked up with Rajendran. Rajendran. Rajendran runs a packaging company on the outskirts of Chennai. claiming that the money had not been paid back. In the late 1990s. he is spending a lot of time preparing for court cases on his own. Subramanian still functions out of the Subhiksha office and the firm has opened a few stores in Chennai. Failed Model: A Timeline 1997: Subhiksha Trading Services is set up as a private limited company. The banks want their money (more than Rs 800 crore of loans were outstanding in 2008) back but so far very little has been achieved legally. Whether it is private equity firms willing to glance the other way in return for a quick buck. Today. On December 31. accounting firms relying excessively on management-speak or banks desperate for business. of ICICI Venture's duplicity. promoters accused of violations always manage to stay ahead. Premji Invest officials were blunt about where the blame lay. The other was the discovery of a dossier on Subramanian and Subhiksha. This dossier was shared by Rajendran with IVen officials in October 2007 and with Deloitte and a number of other banks. which were not communicated to us. Vishwapriya declined. If nothing else. Ramnath and Cyril Shroff. That meeting decided the fate of the IPO. Their suspicion stemmed from two different but related developments. "ICICI Venture approached us directly in late 2007 for a pre-IPO investment in Subhiksha.. According to them. compiled by V Rajendran. according to the petition filed in the Madras high court. When word about Shroff's refusal reached Premji Invest. the managing partner of law firm Amarchand Mangaldas. IVen had written emails to Premji Invest in January 2008 saying that the 10% stake sale in Subhiksha was a pre-IPO placement. 2007 between Subramanian. Shroff declined to give the green signal for the IPO plan. they blamed IVen for hiding facts. what was not known to us then. was that. The ministry of corporate affairs is trying to get the stay on the SFIO probe vacated and another hearing is scheduled soon. Friends praise his brilliant intellect and his innovative streak that briefly made him a darling of the media and the envy of the retail industry ." a friend who studied with him at IIT Chennai said. repaid the loan and asked for the papers.. That is why perhaps. It becomes a public company in 2005 . 2000: ICICI Venture makes its first investment in Subhikhsa. reports appear in media about delay in payment of salaries. It buys about a 15% stake for Rs 15 crore 2000: ICICI Ventures' Bala Deshpande joins Subhiksha's board. . paves way for winding up. Most of company's 1. lends Rs 50 crore to Subhiksha to tide over acute financial crunch JAN '09 : ICICI Venture and independent directors resign from Subhiksha board.650 shops are shut JAN-MAR '09 : Kotak Mahindra Bank files winding up petition MAR '09 : Madras high court appoints provisional liquidator APR '09 : Decision stayed : but proceedings of winding up can continue JUN '09 : Registrar of Companies. creditors a lso approve proposal NOV '08 : Story board meet called by shareholders and directors meet to discuss problems. appoint a CFO in consultation with the board. Subramanian is asked to prepare accounts for 2007/08. orders a probe into Subhiksha affairs NOV '09 : Supreme Court asks Madras high court to dispose of reverse merger petitions OCT '10 : Madras high court rejects Subhiksha-Blue Green merger. arrears in PF dues OCT '08 : Subhiksha shareholders' meet clears proposal for reverse merger. which has grown to a chain of 50 stores. KPMG is asked to conduct a complete audit DEC 08 : Premji Invest. Chennai. Renuka Ramnath is nominated to the board 2 years later DEC '07: IPO plans called off after legal firm Amarchand Mangaldass refuses to sign off 2008: Azim Premji's Zash Investment acquires 10% stake in Subhiksha from ICICI Ventures for 230cr MARCH '08 : Azim Premji promoted Zash Investmentssigns deal to buy 10% in Subhiksha for 230 crore JUNE '08 : Subhiksha proposes a reverse merger with Blue Green Constructions to get listed MAY-SEP '08: Complaints . 03$:-8.907 ! 5.83..57454808..7 # 2!7025742490/.19070./.704/078..704/078 2009.23.7/2009.38.7/ #03:.94-: 3$:-8.-4:9/0.770.35.7470 '039:708 ..08920398838/0.874394.550.80/945705..14770.3.7/0..398 7054798.0.78.085..70.08920393$:-8.089817893.6:708 89. '039:702.0 574548.341 894708 9-:8.7470 & $:-8.983423.5574.38..3/0438$:-8.783! /:08 % $:-8.2.2039418.4:398147 .78574548.#.83.0780207079:0700343897:.708 .0/-8..3//70.147 .70/9478.8.0892039.88701:8089483411 2!702 8..94389409890/ $ ! 425.89.70.0/411.:88574-028 $:-7. .078020707 . 8-4.. ' $947-4.1742'039:708147 .84.7320/.-4:9.7.90/94 90-4.1722.3.3/ ..0147#8.9478200994/8. 747094$:-8.425.4:79./7...1473/3:5 .308 033.-4.089 03/8#8 .43/:.84389.947870831742$:-8..07.. 3. .708:9 # 49.7/ 48941.00/38413/3:5.7:3.8.80/94.31083/3:5509943 # ./7..7/ ! 8.55439.98$:-8.574-0394$:-8.949/04.947 !# 0.438:9..:9013.8.3/7.3.843.78 ' $:570204:79.8.3/3/0503/039/70.4:7994/854804170.4393:0 & #0897.425090.. .88 .11.08.:/9 !7023.943990-4.554398574..4:79700. '039:70.3 8 8458.0/-:9574.741425.9.0780207075099438 % . 47/078.3./7.6:/. :0700320707 5.