Matches (11)
IPL (2)
WCL 2 (1)
County DIV1 (3)
County DIV2 (4)
Women's One-Day Cup (1)
News

BCCI appeals against lifeline for Punjab

The BCCI has appealed against the against the Bombay High Court's interim stay on the termination of the King's XI Punjab franchise from the IPL

ESPNcricinfo staff
14-Dec-2010
Preity Zinta, Lalit Modi and Shilpa Shetty address the media, Mumbai, January 22, 2010

The BCCI has appealed against the High Court's decision in the cases of both Rajasthan and Punjab  •  AFP

The BCCI has appealed, as expected, against the interim stay issued by the Bombay High Court on the termination of the Kings XI Punjab franchise from the IPL. The court's decision effectively allowed the franchise to continue being part of the tournament and even participate in the IPL's next edition in 2011. The BCCI's appeal will be heard on Tuesday - the same day that the court is expected to announce its verdict on the fate of Rajasthan Royals in the IPL, in response to the BCCI's appeal against the stay on the franchise's termination issued by the independent arbitrator in the case.
On December 8, Judge SJ Vajifdar had stated that, "prima facie", Punjab had a strong case against its expulsion but his interim stay carried several riders, the most important being that the franchise cannot change its shareholding pattern and its control should rest in the hands of four main owners: Ness Wadia, Preity Zinta, Mohit Burman and Karan Paul. The BCCI, in its appeal, claimed Punjab "did not make out a strong prima facie case that its consortium members were always in control", and that the franchise did not meet the legal requirements needed to get the interim stay.
In October the BCCI had terminated Punjab, holding the franchise guilty for violating the franchise agreement on three counts, the biggest offence being that the ownership had changed twice in the first three years of the league, something that went unreported to the Indian board.
The High Court's decision will be in operation until a new arbitrator - after Justice Srikrishna, the original agreed-upon arbitrator withdrew citing a conflict of interest - appointed by the disputing parties passes his verdict.