AZB, Desai & Diwanji fire up Olympus $300m PE stake in Tata Power assets

Wednesday, 14 July 2010 By Neha Chauhan Private equity / VC

AZB & Partners advised close client Tata Power in raising $300m by selling up to 15 per cent in two of its Indonesian coal-assets-owning special purpose vehicles (SPVs) Bhira Investments and Bhivpuri Investments to private equity house Olympus Capital Holdings Asia, which Desai & Diwanji and US firms Milbank Tweed and Purrington Moody Weil advised.

Tata Power hopes to utilise the proceeds of this PE investment for the acquisition of coal mines and reduction of outstanding debt in the SPVs.

AZB capital markets partners Shameek Chaudhuri was assisted by associate Vinay Kurein and led the team for the Tata company.

Desai & Diwanji Mumbai partner Apurva Diwanji advised private equity firm Olympus Capital Holdings on the Indian law aspects.

Milbank Singapore partner Naomi Ishikawa and Purrington Moody Weil founding partner Nick Purrington, who is based in North Carolina, were international counsels to the private equity firm.

The deal entails issuing new shares with differential rights to Olympus Capital.

According to the company statement, Tata Power holds interest in the KPC and Arutmin coal mines in Indonesia through the SPVs. In June 2007, Tata Power had acquired a 30 per cent stake in these coal mines for $1.225bn.

Subject to regulatory approvals, the investment is one of the biggest private equity deals of the year according to financial news website VCCircle.

Photo by Marcus Vegas

Comments

Anonymous guest 15 Jul 2010, 02:28

+0 -0

Milbank's advice constitutes practice of the law. Even if the advice was wholly given from Singapore (seems unlikely) i can be argued that teleconferenceing counts as as practice in India since the advice was received in India. Just shows the absurdity of the outdated advocates act. Wonder what the Madras HC will say about this.

Anonymous guest 15 Jul 2010, 03:17

@1
Milbank would have given foreign law advice, which Indian law firms are not allowed to. In multi jurisdiction transactions, there will be more than one law firm advising on the law relating to their respective jurisdiction.

(and that teleconferencing argument was just awesome! (you..mooter i guess?..i scooter!)

i am sick of all conversations on legally india being dragged to the entry of foreign law firms to india issue!!!

Anonymous guest 15 Jul 2010, 17:25

Section 30 says: "Subject to provisions of this Act, every advocate whose name is entered in the State roll shall be entitled as of right to practise throughout the territories to which this Act extends..."

Now if I go to singapore and take advice its fine. but if i am in delhi and a "foreign" lawyer advises me through video conferencing on then i think the advocates act applies. this act was framed 50 years ago when this was not possible so it needs to be updated.

i wonder what SILF, balaji, gopal subramanium and the anti-liberalisation lobby has to say about this.

Anonymous guest 15 Jul 2010, 17:27

I couldn't agree more with #3. It feels like every freakin issue reported on this site is somehow mysteriously connected to entry of foreign law firms. Get a life, guys, and get a move on........or at least, get a new gripe, for Heaven's sake :-)

Anonymous guest 15 Jul 2010, 20:43

The point is the Advocates Act nowhere says a person whose name is not entered on the rolls of a State Bar Council cannot grant legal advice.

Anonymous guest 15 Jul 2010, 20:58

Our Indian lawyers is much better than firang lawyers and can give thousand times better advice. Only macaulayite brown sahibs want firang law firms. Why dont you change your names also to tom and john? Indians wrote great law books like Manusmriti thousands of years before europeans.

Anonymous guest 15 Jul 2010, 22:30

@6: Why call your desi firms partnerships? Just call them hindu undivided families!

Anonymous guest 16 Jul 2010, 18:17

@#3- when sec 30 of the advocates act says "Subject to provisions of this Act, every advocate whose name...." , please also refer to the definition of an advcate within the act which is defined as "advocate means an advocate entered in any rolls under the provisions of this act". ALso, the Advocates Act provides for enrolment only in any bar council within India. hopefully this clears some smoke from your head.

@7- If you call them HUF, all members of the HUF(read associates) will have coparcenary rights and will be able to call for a partition anytime (which again goes against the whole reason why you want to call it a HUF and not a partnership!). Also, if you have so much angst, why dont you start your own stuff and see whether you want to dilute your holding in it (pl note i have nothing to do with any family run firm (actually or allegedly!)

Anonymous guest 16 Jul 2010, 19:57

#8 it is you who needs to clear up the smoke from your head. what section 30 indirectly says is that non-advocates cannot practice law. since "foreign lawyers" cannot be advocates they cannot practice law. the recent bom hc judgement confirms this.

as for your pathetic defence of the family law firms, the less said the better,

Anonymous guest 17 Jul 2010, 05:57

complete madness!!!which world do you guys live in? you can change or be left behind - carry on reading manusmriti

Anonymous guest 18 Jul 2010, 08:10

For All !!

Lets learn smthin!! not just argue argue n argue! Indian Companies are turning truly global! How can we avoid deal related advice frm foreign law firms! ?

There will be oppositions! Time has come.. we all shld equip ourselves to give tough competition to our competitors and also see that the spirit of 'justice' be upheld thro our actions and thoughts!(by availing our clients d best advice!)

I may pls be guided/corrected if I have gone overboard!

Commenting is closed for this article.