A millionaire donor who funded private jet travel for Rishi Sunak is facing a second civil court action in which it is alleged he committed fraud over a £15.8m share sale, i can reveal.
In the latest High Court action faced by sleep guru Akhil Tripathi, a United Arab Emirates investment giant accuses Tripathi of “fraudulent intent” after he claimed he was selling the firm shares on behalf of a “friend”, when he was acting on behalf of his sister.
As previously revealed by i, Mr Tripathi is already facing a court action over his actions as co-founder and chief executive of Signifier Medical Technologies (SMT).
The Prime Minister is also facing questions from Labour over a £38,500 donation from Mr Tripathi, which funded private jet flights for Mr Sunak and his staff to Conservative Party events last April.
In the latest action, which has been filed in the Business and Property division of the High Court, multi-billion-pound investment firm Waha Capital (Waha) claims Mr Tripathi misled them over the identity of the individual on whose behalf Tripathi sold the shares in SMT.
In the court documents obtained by i, Waha alleges that Akhil Tripathi lied to the firm over his relationship to Jyoti Pandey, claiming she was a friend and not his sister.
The claim, which also names Jersey-based financial advisor Highvern Trustees as a second defendant, reveals how Waha director Hitesh Gupta, who was negotiating the share sale with Mr Tripathi, first discovered he was selling the stake in SMT on behalf of his sister.
Mr Tripathi’s lawyers at Mischon de Reya told i that the claim is disputed and will be robustly defended.
The Particulars of Claim states that during a meeting on 14 June last year, Mr Gupta explained that he knew that Ms Pandey was Mr Tripathi’s sister.
The filing adds: “In response, Mr Tripathi denied this and told Mr Gupta that he did not know Ms Pandey’s family background and that she was not his sister.
At a subsequent meeting on the same day, Mr Gupta showed Mr Tripathi a copy of Ms Pandey’s passport, which gives her father’s name as ‘Shailendra Tripathi’.
In response, Waha alleges that Mr Tripathi asked Mr Gupta: “What can I do to make it up to Waha?”; “Who else have you informed about this?”; and “Should I disclose this to the board?”
The court filing adds: “Mr Tripathi’s fraudulent intent is also to be attributed to Highvern, Mr Tripathi having made those representations as a representative of those entities on their behalf. Further or alternatively, Highvern is vicariously liable for the fraud of Mr Tripathi given his status as its agent or other representative.
“Mr Tripathi is liable in deceit for the false representations made knowingly or recklessly and which induced Waha Capital to enter into the share purchase agreement.”
Waha goes on to allege that Tripathi had a financial interest in the sale, as well as his sister, via a trust represented by Highvern Trustees.
i understands that Waha and the defendants have agreed an extension to the deadline for filing the defence until 2 April 2024.
Waha is claiming the £15.8m which was spent in acquiring the shares of Mr Tripathi’s sister to be repaid, excluding any costs or interest.
In the other court action, Mr Tripathi is facing a legal challenge brought by a group of SMT investors.
In the Business and Property Court of the Chancery Division, Mr Tripathi has denied all the claims, which relate to an alleged breach of duties as director of the company, removal of directors from the company’s board, and payments for the sale of shares.
Earlier this month i revealed that the Labour Party had asked the Electoral Commission to investigate donations to Mr Sunak and the Conservative Party from a private medical firm and Mr Tripathi, who made his fortune from an anti-snoring device launched by SMT.
Highvern declined to comment.
