Tycoon seeks to sell Regent’s Park property to fund multi-million-dollar lawsuit

A Regent’s Park property owned by an Indian tycoon has thrown up an argument about access to justice for indebted billionaires. Businessman Bavaguthu Raghuram Shetty is in dispute with Barclays. He is the founder of NMC Healthcare, a company formerly listed on the London Stock Exchange, which went into administration on 9 April 2021 following the discovery of fraudulent activities and significant undisclosed borrowings. According to a ruling handed down last week, the bank is chasing him to repay more than $131m (£96m) relating to debts racked up in foreign exchange transactions that went unpaid owing to the failure of his business empire. Barclays has already won a court case in Dubai ordering him to pay the money, and has been seeking summary judgment in the English courts to enforce the ruling. Shetty’s assets, including a Regent’s Park property, are frozen under a worldwide freezing order to safeguard them during the court proceedings. Shetty has been seeking to get the summary judgment hearing adjourned until later this year so that he can obtain legal advice to fight it properly. He claims, according to the ruling, that owing to the worldwide freezing order, he has found it difficult to instruct lawyers in the UK, and it would be unfair for him to have to fight the case without proper representation. The ruling states that he has been seeking permission from Barclays to sell the Regent’s Park property so that he can pay for legal advice in the UK. Barclays, though its lawyers, opposes this, saying Shetty was seeking consent to the sale in order to pursue and defend other legal proceedings around the world. Barclays wants to realise the value of the flat to satisfy a small part of the debt, the ruling said. A hearing took place in December and, in a ruling handed down last week, High Court judge Mr Justice Henshaw refused to grant an adjournment and gave summary judgment to Barclays. Shetty “has not satisfied the onus of establishing that it would be unfair to proceed with the summary judgment application”, the judge said in his ruling. He added: “He has not shown that any problem arising from lack of legal representation has arisen for any reason other than his own unexplained delay in taking steps to rectify matters.  On the contrary, the evidence as a whole persuades me that his last-minute application, replete with obvious evidential gaps, has been brought as a delaying tactic. “I conclude that Barclays is entitled to summary judgment.” Barclays Bank Plc v Bavaguthu Raghuram Shetty High Court (Queen’s Bench Division) (Henshaw J) 10 January 2022 Photo © Shutterstock