Tine Abraham - India - Lawyer Profile

Position:

Partner

Address:

1st floor, Wing A & B, Prius Platinum
D-3, District Centre, Saket
New Delhi-110017

PO Box:

Telephone:

+91 1141639393

Email:

Contact this Practitioner

Web:

Visit website

LinkedIn:

Join my network

Rating:

Litigation Star

Top 100 Women in Litigation - Asia Pacific

Top 40 under 40 - Asia-Pacific

Languages:

English
Hindi

Jurisdiction:

India

Practice area:

Commercial and transactions

Biography

A distinguished practitioner with nearly sixteen years of experience, Tine specialises in complex commercial disputes, and has been at the forefront of some of India’s largest shareholder arbitrations, company mismanagement litigations, and insolvency resolutions in recent years. Tine represents numerous international and domestic clients from diverse industries, including finance, infrastructure, and e-commerce, and has been consistently ranked as a leading lawyer by Chambers and Partners, Legal 500, and Benchmark Litigation. In 2023, Tine was recognized by Asian Legal Business as one of “India’s Top Disputes Lawyers.”

Tine also serves as a member on the Young Singapore International Arbitration Centre Council. Apart from her commitments in advocacy across multiple forums, Tine also acts as an arbitrator.

Recent matter/case highlights

Vistra ITCL (India) Limited Reliance Capital Limited (RCL) had issued non-convertible debentures of approximately INR 16,200 crores. Ms. Abraham led the Trilegal team in advising and representing Vistra, the debenture trustee. Based on this advice, Vistra initiated multiple actions to monetize and enforce security interests and preserving RCL’s assets, including (a) filing a suit with the Bombay High Court; (b) initiating recovery proceedings before the Debt Recovery Tribunal; and (c) initiating a cooperative asset monetization process with RCL. However, inter-creditor disputes and RCL’s lack of cooperation delayed recoveries. The team, led by Ms. Abraham, advised engaging with the RBI, leading to the initiation of RCL’s corporate insolvency resolution process (CIRP) in December 2021. RCL’s insolvency significantly impacted the Indian economy, and the strategies used in the matter are being adopted in broader financial sector insolvencies.
Ricoh India Limited Ms. Abraham led the Trilegal team in advising and representing Ricoh Company Limited (RCL), the Japan-based parent of Ricoh India Limited (RIL), before the National Company Law Tribunal, Bombay (NCLT) and National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) in proceedings for recapitalisation of RIL following its disclosure of financial statement manipulation and embezzlement losses of INR 1,123 crores. The NCLT allowed recapitalisation of RIL to the extent of INR 1,123 crores, which was reaffirmed by the NCLAT in the appeal filed by the BSE. Ms. Abraham also led the team in representing RCL and NRG Group Limited in a Minority Petition alleging oppression and mismanagement, which was dismissed in February 2020. They further advised RCL on its rights and strategy during RIL’s insolvency proceedings and change of management. This matter, reflects the impact of insolvency proceedings and CIRP against a debtor company on matters relating to allegations of oppression/mismanagement in such a company.
India Resurgence Fund (India RF) – Scheme 2 India RF invested around INR 340 crores in Primacy Industries Pvt. Ltd. (PIPL) and, upon a put-trigger event under the SHA, exercised its put option to exit for INR 612 crores, which PIPL and Promoters disputed, leading to an arbitration under the SIAC Rules, 2016. India RF filed a claim for INR 612 crores plus 17% interest, and subsequently agreed to a settlement providing over 150% return on investment. Ms. Abraham led the Trilegal team in advising and successfully representing India RF in the Singapore-seated arbitration under SIAC Rules. This case is significant as it involves a dispute between a major Indian investment fund and a prominent business entity, and affirms the enforceability of put options as investor exit rights in India. It also offers key insights for investors negotiating exits from Indian companies.
3i India Infrastructure Investments Limited In 2010, 3i India invested INR 500 crores in KMC Infratech Limited (KMCIL), and in 2017, entered into an agreement granting 3i an exit through staggered payments secured by Receivables. KMC failed to make payments, leading 3i to seek relief in the Delhi High Court and initiate arbitration. The parties later entered into a Framework and Share Purchase Agreement to settle the matter, resulting in a consent arbitral award. Ms. Abraham led the Trilegal team in representing 3i India in both the Delhi High Court and arbitration proceedings. The matter valued INR 521.20 crores and is significant as the arbitral tribunal had to determine whether the obligation of KMC to pay the Purchase Considerations by specific deadlines under the Inter Se Agreement was absolute or conditional on receipt of Receivables by KMC.
ANI Media Private Limited v. Wikimedia Foundation Inc. ANI Media filed a defamation suit against Wikimedia Foundation Inc. (Foundation) and anonymous users of the English Wikipedia (Platform), seeking an injunction to remove allegedly defamatory content and disclose user details. The Delhi High Court initially directed the Foundation to disclose the identities of users who posted the allegedly defamatory content on the Platform. However, the Foundation successfully appealed, resulting in a first-of-its-kind order directing the Foundation to submit user details in a sealed cover solely to the Court. The Single Judge passed a final order in an Interim Application (Injunction Order) directing the Foundation to (a) takedown the allegedly defamatory content, and (b) ensure that such content does not re-appear on the Platform. Wikimedia challenged the Injunction Order before the Division bench of the Delhi High Court, which refused to grant a stay on the Injunction Order, and passed an overbroad and arbitrary order directing the Foundation to remove any alleged defamatory content available on the Platform within 36 (thirty-six) hours of receiving a notification from ANI Media identifying such content (8 April Order). In this regard, the Foundation challenged the 8 April Order by way of a special leave petition. The Supreme Court set aside the 8 April Order and the Injunction Order since both the orders failed to specifically ascertain the allegedly defamatory statements to be removed from the Platform. Ms. Abraham led the Trilegal team representing Wikimedia in the Delhi High Court and Supreme Court, with the matter valued at approximately INR 2.1 crores. The case involves key questions of law regarding intermediary obligations and balancing freedom of speech with professional reputation.