12 August 2022

Family Dealings: Abchal Investments v. Saini

In 2019, Parminder Bawa purchased an Oamaru dairy from the wife of Aman Saini.  Aman’s brother Akashdeep Saini paid Bawa $35,000, part of a Saini family arrangement intended to get the sale finalised.  Now everyone is in court with no agreement as to basic details of the business purchase and a dispute whether the $35,000 was a transfer of funds or a loan.

The High Court was faced with differing views as to purchase price for the dairy, whether any vendor finance was involved and circumstances surrounding signature of documents.  Associate judge Taylor declined to order liquidation of Mr Bawa’s businesses for non-payment of the disputed loan, ruling there was considerable dispute as to what was owed.  With credibility issues at stake, a full trial was needed with witnesses cross-examined, he ruled.      

Evidence was given of Mr Bawa seeking to drive down the Saini family’s initial $250,000 asking price for the dairy on grounds he was having trouble getting sufficient bank finance to bridge the gap from $100,000 cash he had available.  Hurried negotiations prior to Christmas left each side having a different view of what was agreed.  Lawyers were not involved.  Akashdeep Saini says Mr Bawa signed an agreement clearly recording as a loan his $35,000 intended as family vendor finance augmenting Heartland Bank funding for Mr Bawa’s purchase of the dairy.  Mr Bawa denies being made aware of the content of documents put to him by the Saini family for signature.  He says he was under the impression that the $35,000 Saini family money given him was to go straight back to the Saini family in reduction of the purchase price – in effect having the Saini family paying part of the purchase price itself. Saini family says this interpretation is a commercial nonsense. Akashdeep claims he is now owed $54,500 on the original $35,000 plus interest.  

Both sides disagree on what was the supposed final purchase price for the business: Saini family says it was $250,000; Mr Bawa $200,000. Documentary evidence held by each side cannot be reconciled.  Mr Bawa says he has paid in full all that is owing. He alleges business turnover was exaggerated in negotiations during the purchase and that he has already paid too much.

Abchal Investments Ltd v. Saini & Value Save Ltd v. Saini – High Court (12.08.22)

22.142