India decides that it wants back the S-band spectrum that is the subject of the Antrix-Devas Agreement and so designates Dr K. Radhakrishnan, former Secretary of Space and Chairman of ISRO, as a “one-person committee to investigate” the Devas Agreement. The committee of one, Dr B. N. Suresh of the Indian Institute of Space and Technology, concludes (the “Suresh Report”) in May 2010 that there was no wrongdoing by Devas.

Ramachandran Viswanathan WS Page 6

Throughout the 2006-10 time period, Antrix/ISRO officials personally assured Devas and its investors that the Government of India was fully behind the Devas Agreement.

Ramachandran Viswanathan WS Page 54

Devas leadership hold meetings with Sam Pitroda, Advisor to the Prime Minister and Shiv Shankar Menon, the National Security Advisor to the Prime Minister. Pitroda and Menon are supportive of the Devas deal. Dr. Radhakrishnan refuses to meet with Devas.

Ramachandran Viswanathan WS Page 58

Dissatisfied with the result of the Suresh Report, Dr K. Radhakrishnan seeks a formal opinion of the Additional Solicitor General (ASG) of India, Shri Mohan Parasaraan. The ASG advises that the clause for termination in the Devas Agreement “cannot be invoked at this stage for the purpose of terminating the contract.” Rather, Parasaraan advises that the Government of India should manufacture a “force majeure” event in the form of a government policy decision to justify termination of the contract: “[i]n my view, instead of the Department of Space directing Antrix to terminate the contract, it will be advisable from a legal perspective that the direction comes from the Department of Space on the basis of a governmental policy decision.” Parasaraan writes further that the Devas Agreement falls “within the doctrine of force majeure.”

Ramachandran Viswanathan WS Page 7

Devas CEO Ramachandran Viswanathan holds a meeting with the Executive Director of Antrix, KR Sridhara Murthi. Mr. Viswanathan receives reassurances that GSAT-6 (the initial Devas satellite) will be completed within one or two months.

Ramachandran Viswanathan WS Page 63

In a letter to the Prime Minister of India, Devas CEO Ramachandran Viswanathan, outlines the many achievements of the Antrix-Devas partnership to date, which were achieved with the full cooperation and assurances of DOS/ISRO/Antrix officials.

Ramachandran Viswanathan WS Page 68

Devas responds to Antrix’s February 25 termination letter, and seeks a meeting with senior leaders of Antrix/ISRO. Antrix/ISRO do not respond until six weeks later on April 15 and encloses payment of US$ 13 million as “reimbursement.” Devas returns the check.

Ramachandran Viswanathan WS Page 71

One month after Devas filed the ICC claim, India’s Office of the Registrar of Companies (ROC) demands records, books, and files from Devas for immediate inspection. The ROC continues to request various documents for inspection, involving categories of information completely irrelevant to the Devas deal. A Delhi High Court rules that the ROC cannot take any additional coercive steps against Devas. Nonetheless, the ROC issues eight new notices to Devas and its directors.

Ramachandran Viswanathan WS Paragraphs 217, 218

Outlook India publishes an article stating that the Government of India has blacklisted four ISRO scientists. The four scientists defend their role in the Devas Agreement and express confusion about why ISRO chief K. Radhakrishan singled them out.

Deutsche Telekom, an investor in Devas, initiates the third of the three arbitrations against the Republic of India before an UNCITRAL tribunal seated in Geneva, Switzerland, also under the UNCITRAL Rules.

Antrix begins efforts to set-aside the ICC Award in India. For several years, Antrix attempted to have those proceedings based in Bangalore, even though the tribunal was seated in New Delhi and set aside proceedings are meant to take place at the seat of the arbitration.

The ED freezes bank accounts and other assets of Devas in India. The ED also seizes the accounts of Devas personnel.

Petition to Recognize and Confirm Foreign Arbitral Award. W.D. Wash. Case No. 18-cv-01360. Paragraph 81

The UNCITRAL tribunal in Geneva presiding over the arbitration initiated by Deutsche Telekom concludes that India intentionally misled Devas and wrongfully terminated the Devas Agreement, which made the country liable under the Bilateral Investment Treaty with Germany for “failing to provide “fair and equitable treatment” to Deutsche Telekom’s investments.

UNICTRAL Interim Award to Deutsche Telekom. Paragraph 424(b).

The BIT Award as to Quantum was made by the UNCITRAL tribunal in The Hague on October 13, 2020, ordering the Government of India to pay the Mauritian shareholders of Devas damages totaling US$ 160 million plus accrued interest, including:

• $50,497,600 as compensation to Plaintiff CC/Devas (owner of 17.06% of the issued share capital of Devas)
• $10,300,800 as compensation to Plaintiff DEMPL (owner of 3.48% of the issued share capital of Devas)
• $50,497,600 as compensation to Plaintiff Telcom Devas (owner of 17.06% of the issued share capital of Devas)
• interest on the above amounts “at a rate of the six-month USD LIBOR + 2 percentage points, compounded semi-annually from February 17, 2011 until the date of full payment”
• $10,000,000 to Plaintiffs for their costs, including legal fees, plus interest at a rate of the six-month USD LIBOR + 2 percentage points compounded semi-annually from the date of the Award until the date of full payment

UNCITRAL Quantum Award to CC/Devas et al. Paragraph 663.
CC/Devas v. Air India. Paragraph 25.

On the same day, with few options left and sensing defeat, the Government of India moved to change Indian arbitration law. The order, issued by the Indian Ministry of Law and Justice, amended the Indian Arbitration and Conciliation Act of 1996 to require that Indian courts “unconditionally” stay any arbitral award when there is a prima facie showing that the “arbitration agreement or contract which is the basis of the award . . .was induced or effected by fraud or corruption.”

India’s Finance Minister spearheads an Inter-Ministerial Monitoring Committee to expedite proceedings against Devas “on a war-footing.”

In January 2021, the Mauritian shareholders of Devas sought confirmation of the BIT Award in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. After India failed to respond or acknowledge Devas’s attempts to serve it pursuant on January 21, 2021, and March 26, 2021, Devas accomplished service on May 28, 2021. India’s response is due by July 27, 2021.

CC/Devas v. Air India. Paragraph 3.

Antrix seeks authorization from its parent, the Indian State, for authorization under the National Companies Act to bring a winding‑up petition against Devas, to which Antrix now owes US$ 1.3 billion.

Solicitor General Mehta successfully convinces the NCLT to appoint a government liquidator to wind up Devas. In its ruling, the NCLT concluded that Antrix had, “prima facie proved that [Devas] has resorted [to] various frauds, misfeasance, connived with officials etc. in obtaining” the Agreement – even though neither Antrix nor the Government of India alleged fraud during the arbitration proceedings.

Judge Zilly of the U.S. District Court Western District of Washington noted in a ruling that Antrix never argued fraud in the arbitration or confirmation proceedings, and issued his caution over the wind up proceeding and firing Devas’s counsel: “[s]uch actions, taken to undermine a litigant’s right to an appeal or its ability to defend itself in foreign courts, could, in and of themselves, amount to irreparable harm” and that “substantial evidence suggests that collusive conduct may be afoot, see supra, Section 3(B), thereby frustrating this Court’s interests in ‘prevent[ing] vexatious or oppressive litigation’ in a foreign forum and in ‘protect[ing] [its] jurisdiction.’” Finally, in a blow to the Government of India’s efforts to use these sham proceedings to railroad Devas in the U.S. courts, Judge Zilly indicates that he will not vacate any judgment based on these collusive and sham proceedings occurring in India.

The NCLT issues an order to forcibly liquidate and sanction the expropriation of Devas Multimedia Private Ltd. The NCLT admits the reason for the expropriation is to prevent Devas from using its incorporated status for “enforcing the ICC Award” outside of India, which they claim would “abuse the process of law.” The Indian Government must seize Devas because it owns the ICC Award. As a result of this order, the Indian Government’s sophisticated scheme to unlawfully evade payment of the ICC Award is now fully transparent.

Within days of the Ninth Circuit ruling, the Indian Supreme Court declined to issue a stay on the liquidation order in the intervening period before the NCLAT appeal hearing on July 8, which is customary in such a situation. The Indian Government continued to implicate its judiciary in the scheme to unlawfully evade payment.

The High Court of Justice in London rules that Devas shareholders can join ongoing efforts to enforce the $1.3 billion arbitral award granted by the ICC, a step in safeguarding the award from expropriation attempts by the Indian Government.

NCLAT upholds NCLT decision and allows winding up of Devas to proceed. Devas plans appeal.

Devas shareholders file a motion in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington to register enforcement of the $1.3 billion arbitral award, granted by the ICC, nationwide.

The U.S. District Court in the Western District of Washington rules that there is reasonable cause to allow Devas shareholders to pursue assets owned by Antrix in any U.S. jurisdiction where they can provide evidence of same and granted shareholders’ approval to target Antrix assets in the Eastern District of Virginia.

The Indian Supreme Court upholds the NCLT order, denying Devas’ appeal. In a press conference, Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman repeats false allegations of fraud against Devas and vows to use the High Court’s decision to evade paying what is rightfully owed to shareholders of Devas