Economic Times reported that in a bid to end the uncertainty over the setting up the first ever titanium project worth of about INR 2000 crore proposed to be set up in the country at Chhatrapur in Orissa’s Ganjam, Orissa government has decided to call a meeting of the 2 promoters in the first week of March.
The JV project has run into serious problem in the wake of differences between the Indian promoters Kolkata based Saraf Agencies Private Limited, Titanium Mineral Product Limited and Russian promoters, Federal Property Management and JSC Technochim Holding over the land ownership. Indian and Russian promoters have 45% and 55% equity stake in the JV Company, Titanium Products Private Limited.
Official sources said that the JV had signed a memorandum of understanding with the Orissa government on October 15th 2008 and the project was scheduled to be completed by October 2010. The promoters, who met here in October 5, last year to sort out the growing differences, had failed to break the ice pushing the project to a blind alley. The promoters, however, then agreed to engage themselves in further negotiations to break the impasse.
Mr Raghunath Mohanty industries minister of Orissa said that we have called both the promoters to resolve their problems to ensure that the project takes off quickly. Incidentally, both the promoters have now offered to set up their own plants if the matter is not sorted out.
TPPL’s Russian partners, namely, Government of Russia and JSC Technochim Holding have taken strong exception to the controversial manner in which the state owned Industrial Infrastructure Development Corporation has allotted land to the FDI project. The project also has got special economic zone status.
State owned Industrial Development Corporation had executed a lease deed with Kolkata based Saraf Agencies Private Limited, the Indian stakeholder in the company on February 2nd 2009, for around 199 acres in Chatrapur area for setting up the project. The Russians have objected to it on the grounds that the land ought to have been given to the JV TPPL instead of SAPL.
(Sourced from Economic Times)
