Bid & Hammer strikes back

A resurgent Bid & Hammer emerges as the true crusader against fakes in the Indian art market. Team Viva does a review

An original M F Husain painting
from Namrata Shirodkar's collection

It has been two years since Bid & Hammer’s Significant Indian Art auction in New Delhi that created quite a stir in the art fraternity with business rivals and art critics associated with them rancorously crying out “fakes” regarding some of the paintings in the catalogue. For all their noise about starting a “regulatory body for art”, “writing to the PMO” and in case of the Husain & Raza Foundations, avariciously proclaiming themselves to be “sole authenticating bodies”, the campaign was full of rhetoric and eventually withered away as most of the trade smelled foul play and didn’t want to be part of a propaganda by a few individuals whose sales were being effected by Bid & Hammer’s steady prowess. Curiously, none of them had physically inspected the works nor seen the provenance documents, coming as they were from notable estates and collections of Udaychand Mahtab (the Maharaja of Burdwan), artist Hemendranath Mazumder, artist Nandalal Bose, sculpturist Chandan Malakar (an assistant of D P Roy Chowdhury), freedom fighter Radha Devi Goenka and former Miss India and actress Namrata Shirodkar among others.

Commenting on the resulting media  frenzy at the time, Maher Dadha, CMD of Bid & Hammer, said, “The articles were alarmingly false and evidently fabricated, written to create sensational news and scuttle the success of our auction. We stood by our research and the media at the behest of competitors should not have speculated on the unquestionable authenticity of the artworks without any verification. The real cartels and tainted individuals that pass off fakes as genuine are the ones that need to be exposed and we will leave no stone unturned in doing so for the higher interest of Indian art”. 

To prove the point, the auction house, promoted by the Dadha family with a rich business history of over 100 years, trail blazed through the auction and subsequently initiated legal action against all those suspected to have orchestrated and stoked the unfounded controversy.

Those brought in the dock so far with non-bailable arrest warrants are Dadiba Pundole of Pundoles Auction, Vikram Bacchawat of defunct auction portal Emami Chisel, art restorer Ganesh Pratap Singh, Samindranath Mazumder and famous artist Bikash Bhattacarya’s children Bivas and Balaka. Others against whom legal suits have been filed include Ashish Anand of Delhi Art Gallery, Vadehra Gallery, Husain Foundation, Raza Foundation and a few incongruous proponents of the Bengal School. Also, K S Radhakrishnan, an authority on the works of Ramkinkar Baij, has denied making observations on the catalogued watercolour as was fictitiously reported by the media. So has NGMA director Rajeev Lochan with regard to the Nandalal Bose’s painting titled Woman Sitting Under A Tree. Even artist KK Hebbar’s daughters Rekha Rao and Rajani Prasanna are wholeheartedly supporting the cause of Bid & Hammer.

Kaali Sudheer of Muse Art Gallery said, “No company would put their reputation at stake by offering fakes in an open public auction and certainly not Bid & Hammer with their background and formidable knowledge. It’s high time that these self-anointed authenticators of art realise that it is them that are being subject to a public undressing as has been demonstrated in the court proceedings”. Bid & Hammer’s landmark victory in the Ravi Varma Jatayu Vadha (Ravana carrying Sita) painting authenticity case against Kiran Nadar, wife of HCL Technologies founder Shiv Nadar, further proved that the country’s pioneer multi-category auction house has the most robust vetting and authentication process and it is the true crusader against the menace of fakes in the Indian market.

It is precisely why the cloud shrouding the authenticity of Francis Newton Souza’s iconic Mary Magdalene painting (from the November 2010 auction catalogue) also seems to have disappeared as it emerges that works combining three or even four different composite pictures were indeed a unique part of the artist’s oeuvre. An example being a work titled Birth, with a ditto theme, incidentally bought by Kiran Nadar a few months ago at a record-breaking price.

When requested to elaborate on the authentication process that is followed by the auction house, Maher Dadha said, “There are certain basic principles and procedures that need to be adhered to before determining whether a work is genuine or counterfeit. The level of the expert’s knowledge and competence and his ability to justify his opinion is important. The problem arises when two equally qualified experts have diametrically opposing views on the same subject or artist, in which case a committee approach and provenance becomes all-important.”

As the fight against fakes continues, it is business as usual at the auction house with the team working on the upcoming auction, private treaty sales and the recently launched B&H SHOP (www.bnhshop.com) — an online store for affordable art, antiques, jewellery, prints, furniture, home décor, exciting gifts and collectibles. Ankush Dadha, director of Bid & Hammer, said, “In between auctions, we are continuing to engage our patrons and catering to a new collector  base through this venture that does not involve the formalities of an auction. No bids, no registration, the works are available at a flat price and you don’t lose the advantage of buying through us”.

The stakes at Bid & Hammer’s upcoming auction are huge, having sourced rare oils by Manjit Bawa, NS Bendre, MF Husain, SH Raza, Jehangir Sabavala, Bhupen Khakhar, VS Gaitonde, GR Santosh, Amrita Shergil and also Ravi Varma from major collectors, both in India and abroad, who continue to support the auction house. Charu Sharma, board member of Bid & Hammer and one of India’s most popular auctioneers, stated, “With this lineup of artists and superlative quality of the masterpieces our next auction is undoubtedly going to be a path-breaking one.”

(Source: The Pioneer, 8th July 2016)

"Not a single work was a fake"

Maher Dadha, CMD of Bid & Hammer, clears the air on the controversial allegations of counterfeits by business rivals that hit the firm’s last auction in Delhi (excerpt from interview to PTI):

In retrospect was it imprudent to have gone ahead with the auction of 'Significant Indian Art' in Delhi last year, despite allegations of counterfeits in the collection?

Not at all. On the contrary it showed the true mettle and credibility of our team who had the confidence to stand by their assessment of the authenticity of the artworks. Also, the participation of the known and serious art collectors at the auction reaffirmed our decision was right.

The truth was that the majority of those who claimed the art works were fake were no experts. Those who apparently had made unverified guesses at the behest of some rivals wanted to stop the auction at any cost and tarnish our goodwill. A case in point is ‘Delhi Art Gallery’ posting 'defamatory material' on its Facebook page and 'orchestrating rumours'. At our last paintings auction in Delhi, their insecurity came through by the following statement to a newspaper “Bangalore-based Bid & Hammer's attempt to grab a bite of the lucrative Delhi market has been viewed with something akin to suspicion”.

The auction was widely publicised and the catalogue was out months in advance but none of the critics had attended the preview, inspected the documents or clarified their apprehensions with Bid & Hammer’s experts thus raising questions about the legitimacy of their concerns. The fact that most of the allegations were made via the media and on the day of the auction is further evidence of propaganda. Genuine works cannot and should not be simply brandished as fakes by malafide and untenable allegations.

Many auction houses risk discovering fake works - whether it is a Bowring's, a Christies or a Sothebys, your take on this with respect to your auction?

Is there any proof that even a single work was a fake? All the works were authentic. If there had been compelling evidence we would have had no hesitation in accepting our mistake and removing them from auction instead of going in for a public undressing that too in my family's 100th year of enterprise.

What is your opinion on calls for a regulatory body to check fake art?

Very few people in the art market in India today can claim to have a spotless image or the capacity to walk the talk as authenticators. Most have an agenda to earn fame and money even if it entails manipulating the market directly or indirectly.

As such, tainted members already associated with art cartels are the ones who will most likely find their way on such regulatory bodies. Thus we are not in favour of it unless a broad consensus acceptable to each and every fraternity member is arrived at.

What are the best ways of authenticating an art work – authenticating organisations or artist foundations?

There are certain principles and basic procedures that need to be followed to determine whether a work is genuine or questionable.

In the west, authenticating organisations or regulatory bodies or artist foundations have been established and disbanded time and again as they have been found floundering and self-serving more than anything else. Even in India, the talk of regulatory bodies has never taken off because of the vested interest of the people who espouse it.

Artist foundations, run primarily by family members of late artists, are also viewed with suspicion because it is common knowledge that just by virtue of being a family member a person cannot claim art expertise.

Can you comment on the criticism of Susobhan Adhikary, museum curator of Viswa Bharati, questioning a Rabindranath Tagore's artwork at the auction last year?

No expert of standing makes an affirmative comment without inspecting a work and accompanying provenance documents, more so, when another expert of equal, if not greater repute, has vetted the work. Prof Ratan Parimoo who is an authority authenticated our work.

What are the future plans of Bid & Hammer?

We will continue to offer a wide range of rare, exquisite and quality art, antiques, jewellery and collectibles through our auctions. The auction schedule will be announced shortly.

Do you have plans to make Delhi the main base for Bid & Hammer?

We would soon have a representative office in Delhi and by the time of our next auction to be held there we will be on course to making the capital the hub of our paintings and decorative art auctions.

Related Posts:

1. Not a single work was a fake: Bid & Hammer | Economic Times | 1st April 2015 
2. Not a single work was a fake: Bid & Hammer | The Echo of India | 1st April 2015

3. Due diligence for all works put on sale: Bid & Hammer | Business Standard | 22nd March 2015
4. Regulatory body to tackle fake art untenable: Bid & Hammer | Business Standard | 24th Jan 2015

Landmark authenticity case in India finds in favour of the auction house

Delhi: A court in Karnataka, south-west India, has ruled that Shiv-Kiran-Nadar Investments (SKN)—whose director is the Delhi-based collector and museum-owner Kiran Nadar—must pay the full amount for a 120-year-old painting that Nadar bid for at an auction held by the Indian company Bid & Hammer. Nadar won the bidding for Jatayu Vadham, 1895, by Raja Ravi Varma at the “Significant Indian Paintings” sale in Delhi in November 2010; the hammer price was Rs13.5m ($290,000), equivalent to the low estimate for the work.

The auction house, which had sued Nadar and SKN, said that Nadar paid 50% of the total, and then asked for an extended period of 30 days to make the remaining payment. “However, at the end of this credit period when reminded to pay the balance amount, she disputed the authenticity of the work based on the [conservator’s] report,” says a statement from Bid & Hammer.

Ganesh Shivaswamy, the lawyer representing Bid & Hammer, tells The Art Newspaper: “Nadar sought to cancel the sale which the auction house found unacceptable…the dispute which originally commenced only to enforce the payment of [a] remainder matured into an adversarial proceeding regarding the authenticity of the painting itself.” Shivaswamy says that this litigation—where a dispute regarding the authenticity of a work has gone to court—is probably the first of its kind in India.

Jijo Jose, a spokesman for Nadar and SKN, says that Nadar agreed to receive the painting “on payment of half of the sale price… with the understanding that she would get [it] examined and tested by an expert and would complete the sale only if satisfied of [its] authenticity.” But a spokesman for Bid & Hammer said that Nadar “simply changed her mind [in 2010] after delivery of the work and took advantage of the trust we had [put] in her with regards to the payment schedule”.

The 2011 report by the conservator Sreekumar Menon concluded that “the authenticity of the painting under study is questionable and it is very unlikely that the painting is painted by Raja Ravi Varma (1848-1906).” However, in his December verdict, Justice Gururajan— the High Court of Karnataka’s appointed arbitrator—said “what is clear to this tribunal is that the respondents’ expert himself is not sure with regard to authenticity… when an expert subjects a painting [to examination] he should be positive and he cannot leave the question not fully answered.” Menon maintains his view.

The court ruled however that the work “is genuine and answers the description in terms of the catalogue”. (The catalogue describes the provenance as: “Consigned by a very prominent Chennai-based collector, who acquired it directly from the descendants of the Travancore Royal Family from Nagerkovil in Kanyakumari District in Tamil Nadu, in the 1970s.”)

The tribunal found that the agreement was with SKN, not Nadar personally, which must pay Bid & Hammer the balance of 50% of the total sum of Rs16m ($350,000, with buyer’s premium) plus 12% interest, along with legal fees.

Gareth Harris

(Source: The Art Newspaper, London, Section 2, Number 265, February 2015)

Bid & Hammer wins Ravi Varma painting case against HCL Founder's wife Kiran Nadar

12 December 2014, Bangalore: In a landmark verdict running into 81 pages Hon. Justice R. Gururajan (High Court of Karnataka’s appointed arbitrator) has allowed the claims of Bid & Hammer (B&H) against Kiran Nadar, wife of HCL’s Shiv Nadar and owner of the Kiran Nadar Museum of Art as well as director of Shiv-Kiran-Nadar Investments (Chennai) Pvt Ltd., for failing to pay up the dues owed to it for the 120-yr-old Ravi Varmapainting ‘Jatayu Vadha’ that she had bid for on 30 November 2010 at their ‘Significant Indian Paintings’ auction in Delhi. Kiran Nadar and her consultants could not provide sustainable proof for disputing the expertise of the country’s pioneer multi-category auction house Bid & Hammer, promoted by the Dadha Group of companies that recently celebrated 100 years of existence.

The problem began when Mrs Nadar paid 50% of the total she owed to B&H and had asked for an extended timeline of 30 days to make the remaining payment. However, at the end of this credit period when reminded to pay the balance amount she disputed the authenticity of the work based on the report of conservators Shreekumar Menon and Priya Khanna and deliquently failed to pay the remaining amount whilst continuing to enjoy possession of the painting. Not only this, as per the argument submitted by B&H’s advocate, in her cross-examination in Bangalore she admitted to the condition of the painting being “jeopardized”. Shocked at the turn of events after having afforded Mrs Nadar every opportunity, prior to the sale, to establish the authenticity & provenance of the painting through its in-house experts and her own consultants, B&H asked Mrs Nadar to abide by the ‘Terms & Conditions of Sale’ given in the auction catalogue as it not only found Menon’s technical report to be faulty and incomplete but his inspection techniques had admittedly resulted in irremediable damage to the painting.   When she refused to abide by the contract B&H was compelled to litigate.

In a counter to B&H’s suit, the counter-affidavit filed by Kiran Nadar’s counsel claimed that “B&H did not possess a license to conduct auctions of National Art Treasures and thus the sale was void”. Dismissing these claims, in what was a centenary year gift to the Dadha’s and a rap on the knucklesfor Mrs Kiran Nadar, the Arbitrator has ordered SKN Investments to pay Bid & Hammer the balance 50% of the total sum of Rs. 1.6 crores plus 12% interest along with arbitrators fees as due, thereby ending a 4 year long legal battle initiated by the auction house against Kiran Nadar. The arbitrator also re-validated the Kerala High Court’s earlier order in which the officials of the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), along with advocate Archana Narayanan, were reprimanded for leveling charges against B&H with mala fide abuse of position. The Kerala High Court had decreed that Bid & Hammer had all the mandatory documents to legitimately carry out its auction business.

Through this verdict Bid & Hammer has done what no other auction house has done so far – to walk the talk and prove beyond doubt that it offers only genuine, well-researched works at its auctions and stands by its opinion no matter what the adversity or who the adversary. An extract from Justice Gururajan’s verdict averred, “In the light of my earlier finding that the respondents have failed to prove with regard to fraud or forgery and also in the light of my finding that the evidence of RW-1 (Menon) and his report do not in anyway prove that the subject painting is not authentic, this Tribunal holds that the subject painting is genuine and answers the description in terms of the catalogue. On the facts and in the given circumstances despite a very strong argument by the learned council for the respondents, I am unable to accept the theory of the subject painting being not authentic in terms of the argument placed before be. I reject his argument”.

“This litigation is probably the first of its kind in India, where a dispute in relation to authenticity of art has been brought before the judiciary. Indian art is on its way to becoming a viable asset and therefore should not be maligned by whimsical opinions. Bid  & Hammer put its shoulder to the wheel by proving the authenticity of the painting by Raja Ravi Varma. The award is therefore a triumph for Indian Art”says Ganesh Shivaswamy, the lawyer for Bid & Hammer.

To date Bid & Hammer have never had to withdraw a work from any of their auctions.  Maher Dadha, Chairman & Managing Director commenting on the verdict said,   “Justice has finally been served and we are vindicated. Bid & Hammer has decisively proven that we have always followed the best practices in the authentication process of our auction sale offerings and all the media propaganda in the lead up to our Significant Indian Art auction in Delhi on 27th June 2014 was the handiwork of vested interests ”.

The judicial mechanism has been utilized by Bid & Hammer in order to exonerate the reputation of Ravi Varma and Indian art. Hitherto auction houses and art dealers have been sycophants to buyers, resulting in good art being degraded by whimsical opinions.  Thus Bid & Hammer also refused Kiran Nadar’s repeated requests for an out-of-court settlement. This is a case where genuine art was maligned and if Bid & Hammer had not persevered, a fine painting would have been brandished as a fake.

 The Painting (Ravi Varma's - Jatayu Vadham), The Claimant (Bid & Hammer's CMD Maher Dadha) & The Indicted (Kiran Nadar - wife of HCL founder Shiv Nadar and owner Kiran Nadar Museum)

                                      At the auction venue on 30th November 2010

                           Bid & Hammer's experts with the painting in the background

ABOUT BID & HAMMER: Established in 2007 by Maher Dadha (industrialist, art collector and also publisher of the book ‘Views of India – Art of the British Raj’) and his sons Ankush Dadha & Apoorva Dadha along with Charu Sharma (auctioneer & commentator), HRH Gaj Singh II (Maharaja of Jodhpur and formerly associated with Sothebys India), Rukmini Varma and Savita Apte (Modern & Contemporary Indian Art specialist, formerly Head at Sothebys London) amongst others, Bid & Hammer’s team of directors, advisors & specialists have a wealth of international experience allied to a deep understanding of the complex dynamics of the Indian market.

At a time when the burgeoning Indian auction market was synonymous with Indian paintings, Bid & Hammer started with the objective of developing the Indian art and auction market beyond paintings by introducing the concept of generalist as well as specialist auctions covering not only Modern & Contemporary Art but also Company School Paintings & Drawings, Miniatures, Jewellery, English & Indian Silver, Antique Swords & Daggers, Period Furniture, Antiquarian Books, Maps, Prints & Photographs (ABMPP), Carpets, Rugs, Tapestries, Cricket Memorabilia and a host of other Decorative Works of Art & Collectibles – a first for any auction house in India!

In sync with the Founder Chairman & Managing Director Maher Dadha’s vision, Bid & Hammer has established itself as India’s pioneering multi-category auction house and is known to have offered important works by prominent Indian artists such as Raja Ravi Varma, Antonio Xavier Trindade, F N Souza and M F Husain, besides iconic English artists J M W Turner, William Hodges and French illustrator Etienne Drian amongst others. The decorative sections have had works by Rene Lalique, Mappin & Webb, Dan Dailey (Daum) and T Manickam Chetty & Sons to name a few.

Related Posts:
1. Raja Ravi Varma Painting not a Fake: Arbitrator
2. Varma 120-yr-old work deemed genuine
3. Kiran Nadar to pay up Rs 1.6cr for Ravi Varma painting

4. Bid & Hammer wins landmark lawsuit
5. Auction House Successful in Recovery Suit Against Kiran Nadar Museum of Art Founder
6. Bid & Hammer wins historic recovery suit against HCL founder's wife Kiran Nadar's 'fake art'    
    propaganda
7. Ravi Varma painting not fake: K'taka HC appointed arbitrator