On December 20, 2019 a
Motion-Secondary
was filed
involving a dispute between
Veludi Capital Strategies,
and
Manuel Pereira,
for Commercial - Contract
in the District Court of Nassau County.
Preview
FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 02/28/2020 02:28 PM INDEX NO. 617853/2019
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 26 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/28/2020
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF NASSAU
X
VELUDI CAPITAL STRATEGIES, LLC, Index No.617853/2019
Plaintiff,
AFFIDAVIT OF
-against- SURESH RAMCHARITAR
MANUEL PEREIRA,
Defendant.
X
SURESH RAMCHARITAR,being duly sworn, deposes and says:
1. I am fully familiar with the facts and circumstances set forth herein. I respectfully
submit this Affidavit in opposition to a motion by plaintiff Veludi Capital Strategies, LLC
(“Veludi”)for summary judgment in lieu of Complaint.
2. I attended several meetings held between Manuel Pereira and Chander Goel
(“Goel”) and his partner, Mr. Sunil Kumar Ponnumala(“Kumar”), known to me as the owners of
Veludi, with respect to certain premium financing life insurance policies involving Mr. Pereira. I
introduced Goel and Kumar to Mr. Pereira.
3. At a meeting held in or about October 2016, Goel and Kumar told Mr. Pereira that
they will provide him with a $25 million in life insurance,that the policy would be paid for through
premium financing and that Mr.Pereira could access and withdraw substantial sums in cash values
that would accrue on the policy. Goel and Kumar said that Mr. Pereira would not have to pay
anything. Mr. Pereira’s only obligation, he was told by Goel and Kumar, was to provide security
for the premium financing arrangement. Mr. Pereira’s family held real estate that could act as
collateral and Goel and Kumar stated that Mr. Pereira could “monetize” the property through the
997154.4 1
1 of 3
FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 02/28/2020 02:28 PM INDEX NO. 617853/2019
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 26 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/28/2020
premium financing of life insurance policies and the accrual and availability of substantial policy
cash values.
4. I recall that Goel and Kumar urged Mr. Pereira to purchase the policy immediately
in December 2016 so that they could make their end ofthe year business quota.
5. 1 attended meetings with Mr. Pereira, Goel and Kumar and Mr. Periera was told
that the substitution of collateral was still being worked on. At a March 2017 meeting, Mr. Periera
stated that he needed to withdraw funds from his brokerage account and learned that he could not
do so because ofthe premium financing arrangement which used his account as collateral. He was
also told that he could not withdraw sums from his policies that had accrued cash value. Mr.Periera
was agitated by the lack of action and broken promises of Goel and Kumar. Given their failure to
live up to their promises, Goel and Kumar agreed that they would advance $700,000 to Mr. Periera
from Veludi.
6. Throughout 2017,1 would often meet up with Mr. Periera, Goel and/or Kumar -
nearly two times a month - for a meal or at cigar bars. Later in 2017, Mr. Periera told me that
payments due on the policies were not being made by Goel and Kumar as they had promised, the
policy were in danger of lapsing and his family’s property was never substituted as collateral as
they also promised. Mr. Pereira expressed his frustration to Goel and Kumar and I recall Goel
stating that he “would get it done”.
7. I specifically recall a meeting with Mr. Periera, Goel and Kumar in March 2018.
Mr. Periera expressed the same frustrations Goel and Kumar were not making the promised
payments; a large policy had already lapsed and Mr. Periera was still denied access to the funds in
his brokerage account and the acerued cash values on his policy. Goel acknowledged these
failures. He sought to gain Mr. Pereira’s confidence that the policy would continue in force and
997154.4 2
2 of 3
FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 02/28/2020 02:28 PM INDEX NO. 617853/2019
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 26 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/28/2020
that Goel and Kumar would do as promised. Goel stated “why are you so upset Maimy, you don’t
have to pay back” the $700,000 that was advanced. At another meeting around that time, I recall
Goel saying “have I ever asked you for the money? You don’t have to pay it back.
8. The next month, in April 2018, Goel and Kumar put their promises in writing
guarantying to Mr. Pereira that they would make the payments required to keep the insurance
policy in effect and that Mr. Pereira would not be required to repay $700,000 to Goel and Kumar.
9. I learned in December 2019 that for the first time in two and one half years, Goel
and Kumar demanded that Mr. Pereira pay them $700,000. That demand is contrary to the express
statements that Goel and Kumar made to Mr. Pereira in my presence.
Sworn to before me this
/ day^f Februar;^020.
y Suresh Ramcharitar
Notary public
Qualitied in Nassau County
NoveiTibar aa, au
Commission Expires
997154.4 3
3 of 3
Document Filed Date
February 28, 2020
Case Filing Date
December 20, 2019
Category
Commercial - Contract
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Preview
FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 02/28/2020 02:28 PM INDEX NO. 617853/2019 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 26 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/28/2020 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NASSAU X VELUDI CAPITAL STRATEGIES, LLC, Index No.617853/2019 Plaintiff, AFFIDAVIT OF -against- SURESH RAMCHARITAR MANUEL PEREIRA, Defendant. X SURESH RAMCHARITAR,being duly sworn, deposes and says: 1. I am fully familiar with the facts and circumstances set forth herein. I respectfully submit this Affidavit in opposition to a motion by plaintiff Veludi Capital Strategies, LLC (“Veludi”)for summary judgment in lieu of Complaint. 2. I attended several meetings held between Manuel Pereira and Chander Goel (“Goel”) and his partner, Mr. Sunil Kumar Ponnumala(“Kumar”), known to me as the owners of Veludi, with respect to certain premium financing life insurance policies involving Mr. Pereira. I introduced Goel and Kumar to Mr. Pereira. 3. At a meeting held in or about October 2016, Goel and Kumar told Mr. Pereira that they will provide him with a $25 million in life insurance,that the policy would be paid for through premium financing and that Mr.Pereira could access and withdraw substantial sums in cash values that would accrue on the policy. Goel and Kumar said that Mr. Pereira would not have to pay anything. Mr. Pereira’s only obligation, he was told by Goel and Kumar, was to provide security for the premium financing arrangement. Mr. Pereira’s family held real estate that could act as collateral and Goel and Kumar stated that Mr. Pereira could “monetize” the property through the 997154.4 1 1 of 3 FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 02/28/2020 02:28 PM INDEX NO. 617853/2019 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 26 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/28/2020 premium financing of life insurance policies and the accrual and availability of substantial policy cash values. 4. I recall that Goel and Kumar urged Mr. Pereira to purchase the policy immediately in December 2016 so that they could make their end ofthe year business quota. 5. 1 attended meetings with Mr. Pereira, Goel and Kumar and Mr. Periera was told that the substitution of collateral was still being worked on. At a March 2017 meeting, Mr. Periera stated that he needed to withdraw funds from his brokerage account and learned that he could not do so because ofthe premium financing arrangement which used his account as collateral. He was also told that he could not withdraw sums from his policies that had accrued cash value. Mr.Periera was agitated by the lack of action and broken promises of Goel and Kumar. Given their failure to live up to their promises, Goel and Kumar agreed that they would advance $700,000 to Mr. Periera from Veludi. 6. Throughout 2017,1 would often meet up with Mr. Periera, Goel and/or Kumar - nearly two times a month - for a meal or at cigar bars. Later in 2017, Mr. Periera told me that payments due on the policies were not being made by Goel and Kumar as they had promised, the policy were in danger of lapsing and his family’s property was never substituted as collateral as they also promised. Mr. Pereira expressed his frustration to Goel and Kumar and I recall Goel stating that he “would get it done”. 7. I specifically recall a meeting with Mr. Periera, Goel and Kumar in March 2018. Mr. Periera expressed the same frustrations Goel and Kumar were not making the promised payments; a large policy had already lapsed and Mr. Periera was still denied access to the funds in his brokerage account and the acerued cash values on his policy. Goel acknowledged these failures. He sought to gain Mr. Pereira’s confidence that the policy would continue in force and 997154.4 2 2 of 3 FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 02/28/2020 02:28 PM INDEX NO. 617853/2019 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 26 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/28/2020 that Goel and Kumar would do as promised. Goel stated “why are you so upset Maimy, you don’t have to pay back” the $700,000 that was advanced. At another meeting around that time, I recall Goel saying “have I ever asked you for the money? You don’t have to pay it back. 8. The next month, in April 2018, Goel and Kumar put their promises in writing guarantying to Mr. Pereira that they would make the payments required to keep the insurance policy in effect and that Mr. Pereira would not be required to repay $700,000 to Goel and Kumar. 9. I learned in December 2019 that for the first time in two and one half years, Goel and Kumar demanded that Mr. Pereira pay them $700,000. That demand is contrary to the express statements that Goel and Kumar made to Mr. Pereira in my presence. Sworn to before me this / day^f Februar;^020. y Suresh Ramcharitar Notary public Qualitied in Nassau County NoveiTibar aa, au Commission Expires 997154.4 3 3 of 3