LAWYER SIBLING LOGO (1)
  • Home
  • Blogs
  • News
  • Updates
  • Constitution
    • Constitutional Laws
  • Laws
    • Civil Law
    • Criminal Law
    • Family Law
    • Real Estate Law
    • Business Law
    • Cyber & IT Law
    • Employee Law
    • Finance Law
    • International Law
  • Special Act
    • Motor Vehicles Act (MV Act)
    • Consumer Protection Act
    • Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Act (NDPS)
    • The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO)
  • Bare Act

UK Court orders Raj Kundra to repay $4.94 million to EMV in Rajasthan Royals shareholding dispute

20/07/2026BlogNo Comments

The High Court of Justice of England and Wales has directed businessman Raj Kundra and Kuki Investments Ltd. to jointly repay US$4,937,887 to Emerging Media Ventures Ltd. (EMV) in a dispute concerning Kundra’s former shareholding in the Indian Premier League (IPL) franchise Rajasthan Royals.

Justice Griffiths of the King’s Bench Division held that Kundra had no realistic prospect of successfully defending EMV’s claim arising from alleged breaches of a 2019 settlement agreement. The court also made permanent an anti-suit injunction restraining Kundra and Kuki Investments from pursuing proceedings in India in matters covered by the settlement.

The dispute relates to Kundra’s former indirect 11.7% interest in Sporting Holdings, the holding company associated with Rajasthan Royals. His interest was acquired in 2009 through Kuki Investments Ltd. Following the Supreme Court of India’s 2015 finding concerning his involvement in betting on IPL matches, the shareholding was subsequently transferred under an agreement executed in August 2015.

The parties later entered into a settlement agreement in 2019 to resolve disputes arising from the share transfer. Under the arrangement, EMV paid Kundra approximately US$4.94 million, while Kundra agreed to relinquish any further claims relating to the shareholding and abide by contractual restrictions concerning future proceedings and public statements.

EMV subsequently terminated the settlement agreement in July 2025, alleging that Kundra had committed material breaches of its terms. It then sought recovery of the settlement amount.

Kundra and Kuki Investments, in their proposed defence and counterclaim, alleged that the share transfer and settlement agreements had been procured through misrepresentation and sought to challenge their validity. However, the court noted that no evidence had been produced in support of those allegations.

Justice Griffiths concluded that there was no real prospect of the defendants establishing that either agreement had been induced by fraud or unconscionable conduct. The court further found that EMV had validly exercised its contractual right to terminate the settlement agreement.

Consequently, Kundra and Kuki Investments were ordered to repay the US$4,937,887, along with applicable interest. The court also permanently restrained them from pursuing proceedings in India falling within the scope of the settlement agreement.

The ruling brings a significant development to the long-running dispute over Kundra’s former Rajasthan Royals stake and reinforces the enforceability of settlement agreements containing exclusive jurisdiction and no-claims provisions.

The post UK Court orders Raj Kundra to repay $4.94 million to EMV in Rajasthan Royals shareholding dispute appeared first on India Legal.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Recent Posts

  • Centre tells Supreme Court: Tribunal Reforms Bill in final stage, may be introduced in monsoon session
  • Supreme Court suggests Sonam Raghuvanshi surrender pending trial, questions delay in raising arrest plea
  • Delhi High Court allows shifting activist Sonam Wangchuk to Medanta Hospital for continuous monitoring
  • Allahabad High Court reduces sentence of 92-year-old in 1982 assault case
  • Lucknow University suspends two law students after Supreme Court courtroom disruption

Recent Comments

  1. Phone Tracking In India - lawyer Sibling on The Constitution of INDIA
  2. Section 437A of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - lawyer Sibling on The Constitution of INDIA
  3. The Evolution of Indian Penal Code 1860: Key Provisions and Relevance Today - lawyer Sibling on The Constitution of INDIA

Follow us for more

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
YouTube
Instagram
DisclaimerPrivacy PolicyTerms and Conditions
All Rights Reserved © 2023
  • Login
  • Sign Up
Forgot Password?
Lost your password? Please enter your username or email address. You will receive a link to create a new password via email.