A legal battle over ownership of a high-end Indian restaurant in Chelsea is heading to trial this month.
Details of the dispute over Kutir, which opened with Michelin starred head chef Rohit Ghai, emerged in a preliminary judgment on security for costs.
Master Kaye said that Neha Beriwala is seeking declaratory relief from the court in her battle with Joga Khangure and Woodstone Properties (Birmingham) Ltd over the restaurant – a dispute complicated by the bankruptcy of Beriwala’s husband, Vipul Beriwala.
The master said that Vipul Beriwala was involved in a property investment business and borrowed £184,000 from successful businessman Khangure, director of Woodstone, only to default on payments and be declared bankrupt in July 2018.
Neha Beriwala then borrowed £249,111 from Woodstone in August 2018 to fund the lease obligations and outgoings of Kutir. She says that she entered into an oral security agreement, pursuant to which the shares in the company owning the lease for Kutir were registered in Khangure’s name.
She says that the restaurant was at all times intended to be her business, owned 50/50 with her restaurant team – Ghai, and an experienced front-of-house manager.
And she claims that she fulfilled the requirements of the security agreement by paying back the £292,000 in March 2019.
However, Woodstone and Khangure maintain that the security agreement also required repayment of £300,000 in respect of Vipul Beriwala’s loans.
In the trial scheduled for January 2021, Neha Beriwala seeks declaratory relief, and an order for the transfer of the shares in Kutir to her, with a view to settling them in accordance with an agreement she reached with her team in 2018.
Woodstone and Khangure are defending the claim, and counterclaiming for their own declaration, alleging that she did not comply with the agreement because her husband’s loans were not repaid.
Complicating matters further, Woodstone and Khangure allege that in April 2019 the dispute was compromised by Neha Beriwala agreeing to pay them the £292,000 already paid, permitting them to retain Kutir and permitting them to retain her own personal financial contribution to the restaurant of £190,000. She denies any such agreement was entered into and says that, while there were without prejudice discussions in April 2019, no agreement was reached.
The master added: “Neither the Security Agreement nor the Share Transfer Agreement are properly documented and appear to have been oral. At trial, the court will need to consider the evidence and make findings based on that evidence as to the nature and consequences of the agreement reached.”
He dismissed the defendants’ application for security for costs.
To send feedback, e-mail jess.harrold@egi.co.uk or tweet @estatesgazette
