questions re proposed bwn board, page-10

Tareqc,
you raised an interesting issue in that there are 4 Bhushan Board members.
The Bhushan Board positions were made available to them under the terms of the Subscription agreement which gave them proportional representation. That was a given in light of the fact that, if they did proceed with the JV, they would control approx 60% of the Company.
The fact is that they did not go ahead with the Subscription Agreement.
They have retained their places on the board and the Company is now technically trading insolvently.
The condition to make the loans repayable should the managing director not be a nominee of Bhushan means that, given there is a General Meeting imminent, there is a contingent liability that the Company may not be able to meet.
I would bet my house on the fact that the Board's legal advisers, if they were consulted on the issue, would have recommended against it.

As for Farrell, previous comments about his role in deferring the meeting seem well researched and placed but I would ask, does Farrell retain the shares he held at the time and if not, who has he sold them to and for what consideration?

All the best