New Delhi, May 23 (IANS) Financial technology company Lendingkart Technologies, which raised over Rs 319 crore in Series D round of funding this week, has laid off nearly 200 employees (30 per cent of its workforce) in the Covid-19 times.
In a statement, the company said that the outbreak of COVID-19 and the resultant slowdown has compelled it take some measures to rationalise employee base across offices to ensure long term sustainable business.
"This exercise is an extension of our annual appraisal cycle, wherein we do rationalize the team by about 15-20 per cent basis performance. This year, additional right sizing has been undertaken to account for the business volumes that we anticipate in this financial year," the company said in a statement on Friday.
The management and leadership team at the company has taken significant pay-cuts.
"All employees exiting the company are being provided with ample notice period, extending up to 3-5 months, which is beyond industry norms, along with extended insurance and medical benefits," said the company.
Lendingkart joins a growing list of startups and unicorns, like Zomato, Swiggy, Ola, Uber, Livspace and Sharechat, that have sacked employees in recent days.
Set up in 2014, Lendingkart has raised over Rs 1,050 crore of equity capital from investors.
"The outbreak of Covid-19 and the resultant slowdown have had a tremendous impact on the economy. During these unprecedented times, the MSMEs, backbone of the economy, have suffered significantly grappling with varied economic uncertainties," Harshvardhan Lunia, co-founder & Managing Director of Lendingkart Technologies, said in a statement earlier this week.
Since its inception, Lendingkart Finance, a non-deposit taking NBFC arm of Lendingkart Group, has evaluated nearly half a million applications, disbursing more than 1,00,000 loans to over 89,000 MSMEs in 1,300 cities across 29 states and Union Territories.
The company said that outplacement services are being provided to support impacted employees.
Lendingkart, which has offices in Ahmedabad, Bengaluru, Mumbai, Delhi NCR and Kolkata, has a service reach across the country.
New Delhi, May 29 (IANS) The Supreme Court on Friday agreed to hear a cross-appeal filed by Cyrus Mistry, seeking more relief than granted by the NCLAT verdict in December 2019.
The apex court issued notice to Tata Sons Pvt Ltd (TSPL) and others, and tagged the cross-appeals with the appeals filed by Tata Sons, Ratan Tata and others challenging the NCLAT verdict, which reinstated Mistry as the Executive Director of Tata Sons. Mistry and his firm sought removal of anomalies in the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) verdict to get representation on the TSPL board.
A bench of Justices A.S Bopanna and Hrishikesh Roy, which took up the matter through video conferencing, said: "Issue notice. Tag with Civil Appeal Nos... And connected matters, if any. In the meantime, pleadings be completed by the parties within a period of four weeks from today. List the matter(s) thereafter."
In January, the apex court had stayed the NCLAT order.
Through the cross-appeal, Mistry is seeking representation on the board in proportion to the 18.37 per cent stake held by his family. The cross-appeal argued that it was incumbent on the NCLAT to have granted proportionate representation that would have ensured that the interests of the SP Group are protected in future.
In the petition, Mistry has described the group's relationship with Tatas as a quasi-partnership relationship of a vintage of over 60 years, holding 18.37 per cent in the equity share capital of Tata Sons and whose stake is now worth over Rs 1.5 Lakh crore.
In January, the apex court had observed, "You (Cyrus) have been out of the saddle for a long time...how does it hurt you today." Tatas were represented through senior advocates A.M. Singhvi, Harish Salve, Mukul Rohatgi and Mohan Parasaran.
A heated argument broke out on the court's remark on the stay of the tribunal judgement. Senior advocate C.A. Sundaram, representing the company Cyrus Investment Pvt Ltd, contended instead of staying the tribunal judgement, the court could order status quo; and a notice could be issued within two weeks to file a reply.
Mistry's side had also wanted to place a note apparently on an interim arrangement, but it was not accepted by the court.
Senior advocate N.K. Kaul represented Mistry and senior advocate Shyam Divan represented the shareholders on Mistry's side. Mistry's side also said that they have been sidelined completely.
Sundaram contended before the bench he was not pressing on relief in connection with the reinstatement, instead he was against the wrong process adopted to remove Mistry.