SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Bom) 249348

HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
HONBLE JUSTICE PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR
JAYASWAL NECO INDUSTRIES LIMITED NAGPUR THR. AUTH. SIGNATORY KAILASH SHARMA – Appellant
Versus
ABHIRUCHI VISION PRIVATE LIMITED KOLKATTA – Respondent
WP/5176/2025



##PAGE1##

2025:BHC-NAG:14914

2312WP5176-25.odt 1 Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

WRIT PETITION NO. 5176 OF 2025

Jayaswal Neco Industries Limited, F8, MIDC Industrial

Area, Hingna Road, Nagpur, Maharashtra – 440016,

Through its authorized signatory Kailash Sharma, Age :

58 years, Occ: Service, R/o c/o F-8, MIDC Industrial

Area, Hingna Road, Nagpur, Maharashtra – 440016. PETITIONER

VERSUS

Abhiruchi Vision Private Limited, 10, Princep Street, 3rd Floor,

Kolkatta, West Bengal 700072. Through authorized Signatory. RESPONDENT

______________________________________________________________

Shri Sunil Manohar, Senior Advocate with Shri Akshat Goel and Shri R.G.

Pandey, counsel for the petitioner.

Shri Deven Chauhan, Senior Advocate with S/Shri C.S. Dhore, A.D. Chaudhari

and C.J. Dhruv, counsel for the respondent.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CORAM : PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, J.

DATE ON WHICH ARGUMENTS WERE HEARD : OCTOBER 07, 2025

DATE ON WHICH JUDGMENT IS PRONOUNCWED : DECEMBER 2 3 , 2025

JUDGMENT

RULE. Rule is made returnable forthwith and heard finally with

consent of the learned counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioner has assailed the order dated 25.06.2025 passed by

the Court of District Judge-2, Nagpur rejecting the application filed by the

petitioner under Order 7 Rule 11 read with Order 7 Rule 10 of the Code of

Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, ‘the Code’) read with Section 15 of the

Commercial Courts Act, 2015 (for short, ‘the Act of 2015).

FACTUAL BACKGROUND:

3. The petitioner is the original defendant in the suit filed by the

respondent for recovery of an amount of Rs.104,43,67,347.94 along with

interest at the rate of 18% per annum. The parties are hereinafter referred

##PAGE2##

2312WP5176-25.odt 2 Judgment

to as the plaintiff and the defendant according to their status in the suit

for the sake of convenience.

4. The plaintiff claims tobe a Non-BankingFinancial Company (NBFC)

and the defendant is a company duly incorporated and registered under

the Companies Act 1956 having business of manufacturing variety of irons

and specialty in steel. The defendant-Company and other companies

belonging to Jayaswal family including a corporate entity viz. Corporate

Ispat Alloys Limited (CIAL) had availed financial facilities and loans from

various lenders and banks for approximately Rs.139 Crores for Strip Mill

Division, which is one of the projects of CIAL. In the month of July-2008

there was a family separation and settlement by which various companies

owned by the members of Jayaswal family were divided amongst them in

between two groups; one being Basant Lal Shaw Group; and other being

Manoj Kumar Jayaswal Group. As per the settlement agreed between the

two groups CIAL came to the share of Manoj Kumar Jayaswal group.

While one project of CIAL viz. Strip Mill Division alongwith its assets and

liabilities got demerged from CIAL and merged with the defendant which

formed part of Basant Lal Shaw group.

5. It is the plaintiff’s case that the liability of discharging loans of strip

mill division fell upon defendant and accordingly from the month of

August-2008 onwards the defendant commenced repayment of loan to the

bankers of Strip Mill Division and in view of various correspondences, the

defendant company acknowledged the debt of the bankers. Thereafter, in

the month of August-2010 the defendant stopped repayment of the

##PAGE3##

2312WP5176-25.odt 3 Judgment

lenders of Strip Mill Division and therefore CIAL which belonged to Manoj

Kumar Jayaswal group started making payments from August-2010 to

March-2013 for and on behalf of the defendant to ensure that the account

of Strip Mill Division did not turn into non-performing asset (NPA). It is

alleged that during this period CIAL made payment of more than Rs.104

Crores to the lenders of Strip Mill Division for and on behalf of the

defendant. In this background, after a dispute arose between the

members of Jayaswal family, the matte

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top