2025News-Mahender-Makhijani
Mohammad Honarkar ("Honarkar") owned a business empire built on house of cards and saddled
with debt. This all came crashing down in 2021 when Honarkar found himself out of money and out of time, as he owed his ex-wife millions in payments and was further facing imminent foreclosure. In June 2021, foreclosure was scheduled to begin in a few days' time and Honarkar was thus in desperate need of a financial lifeline as no lenders would extend $145 million in credit. It was at this time that Honarkar convinced Makhijani and investors to invest in his businesses, agreeing to contribute his assets to a joint venture so long as these investors could leverage their good credit and financial connections to refinance the defaulted loans. The investors did exactly that saving Honarkar from foreclosure and, in addition, contributed another $30 million in capital via cash and commitments and later infused more than $100 million in additional funding to prop up Honarkar's highly-leveraged businesses.
This good deed was repaid in malice when Honarkar sought to re-trade on deal terms and ultimately resorted to litigation to rescind what he claimed was a deal induced by fraud. No such fraud exists but, following a highly irregular arbitration, Honarkar and his operating entity, 4G Wireless, Inc. ("4G," and collectively, the "Honarkar Parties") secured an absurd award allowing him to "rescind" the entire venture notwithstanding the substantial benefits he received and with no evidence he could ever repay the funds invested or put Honarkar back into the situation he was in before, facing imminent foreclosure.
Following years of litigation, the Honarkar Parties now have an arbitration award more info which they hope to leverage for unjustified relief. This award should be vacated in its entirety. As explained herein, the entire arbitration proceeding was tainted with unprecedented procedural irregularity, including the refusal to hear key evidence, intimidation of witnesses and counsel, and blatant bias which has now resulted in an award not founded on facts but apparently crafted to achieve an agenda regardless of means. As it tums out, the Arbitrator's decision may have been prompted by bias as he failed to disclose a prior relationship with Honarkar's counsel, which failure mandates the award be vacated in its entirety. The Arbitrator further berated several key witnesses during the midst of their testimony to impact their testimony, including by telling certain witnesses on the stand that their testimony (which had not been completed) was "just not credible" and calling one witness a "liar" to his face.