It sure looks like Indian IT software house Satyam Computer Services is well and truly screwed in the latest round of a forgery case involving Satyam and online and mobile payments specialist Upaid Systems.
The forgery case involves an old outsourcing job done by Satyam.
Upaid Systems said today that the Court of Appeal in London affirmed a January High Court Judgment in Upaid’s favour against Satyam Computer Services, rejecting Satyam’s effort to block Upaid’s fraud and forgery claims in a Texas court.
Upaid said the decision confirms an earlier High Court judgment in favour of Upaid on all points.
Responding to the UK court’s ruling, a Satyam spokesperson said:
The current decision in the UK court has determined the jurisdiction lies in the U.S. and the underlying case is expected to be tried in 2009. The U.S. case is in a very preliminary stage and has to undergo the due process of law and Satyam is confident that it has merits in this case and will contest the case.
The latest ruling allows Upaid’s lawsuit against Satyam alleging forgery, fraud, misrepresentation, and breach of contract, to proceed to a US trial by jury in a Texas federal court.
Upaid originally filed the Texas lawsuit in April 2007 following the disclosure in Texas of forged documents previously provided by Satyam to Upaid.
Satyam had sought a High Court injunction in London in September 2007 to try to block the Texas case, arguing that a 2003 commercial agreement terminating the relationship between the two companies precluded all future claims against it for all past practices and that any residual claims against it had to be tried in London.
Upaid said the High Court refused Satyam’s request in January 2008. After hearing testimony from senior executives of both companies and legal experts in a four day trial, the Court is said to have ruled that the Texas claims could proceed. Satyam appealed this decision, and it was this appeal which was comprehensively dismissed last Friday by a Court of Appeal panel presided over by Lord Justice Waller, Vice President of the Court of Appeal Civil Division, according to Upaid.
Costs were awarded against Satyam, according to Upaid.
For details on the case, please click below link:
