Karnataka HC Notices Sri Lankan Judge's Rights Plea
07 Mar 2026
Karnataka Proposes Social Media Ban for Under-16s
07 Mar 2026
Justice Dharmadhikari Sworn In as 55th Madras HC Chief Justice
07 Mar 2026
Punjab HC Acquits Ram Rahim in Journalist Murder
07 Mar 2026
Appellate Courts Can Rely on Unexhibited Public Documents Produced by Plaintiff: Gujarat High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Under Section 100 CPC
07 Mar 2026
Punjab & Haryana HC Denies Anticipatory Bail in Murder via Humiliation Case: Sections 103(1) & 3(5) BNS
07 Mar 2026
Security Deposit Forfeiture Without Show-Cause Notice Violates Natural Justice: Himachal Pradesh High Court
07 Mar 2026
S.202 CrPC Inquiry Not Mandatory for Public Servant Complaints If Accused Outside Jurisdiction: Supreme Court
09 Mar 2026
Professor MP Singh: Shaper of Constitutional Discourse
09 Mar 2026
Back
Next 
D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, J. B. PARDIWALA, MANOJ MISRA
Infrastructure Leasing and Financial Services Limited – Appellant
Versus
State Bank of India – Respondent
Headnote: Read headnote
ORDER
1. The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, while allowing IA No 5815 of 2023 instituted by the State Bank of India, issued the following directions :
(ii) Lenders shall also give an undertaking for refund of the amount received, in event ultimately, it is found that they were not entitled to the extent of the amount received by them.
(iii) The above distribution shall be subject to any further orders passed by the NCLT and NCLAT.”
2. Directions (ii) and (iii) above sufficiently safeguard the interest of all stakeholders.
3. In view of the above position and since the impugned order was passed on an interim application, we are not entertaining the appeal at this stage.
4. The Appeal is accordingly dismissed.
5. Pending applications, if any, stand d
The court upheld interim distribution of funds to lenders while ensuring safeguards for stakeholders' interests.
In considering interim relief, courts must weigh the risk of injustice if their decision ultimately runs counter to the course adopted at the time of granting or refusing such relief.
The court emphasized that the impugned order did not affect the petitioner's position as a secured creditor and that the appropriate remedy for the petitioner would be in appeal.
The court reiterated that interim orders protecting rights pending final adjudication are crucial, and only appealable orders determining rights of parties fall under the Companies Act, 2013.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
Listen Article