Indian banks win UK bankruptcy appeal in Vijay Mallya case
London, Apr 9 (PTI): A consortium of Indian banks, led by State Bank of India, on Wednesday won their court appeal in London to uphold a bankruptcy order against Vijay Mallya in a long-standing legal battle seeking repayment of a judgment debt owed by his now-defunct Kingfisher Airlines.
High Court judge Anthony Mann ruled in favour of the banks to allow an appeal heard in February, while refusing two applications seeking permission to appeal filed by the 69-year-old businessman, declared a fugitive and wanted for fraud and money laundering charges in India.
“The banks’ pleaded position on security was one which they were entitled to adopt,” Justice Mann ruled.
“The bottom line in relation to this is that the bankruptcy order stands,” he concludes.
Law firm TLT LLP, representing the banks, noted that the ruling confirmed the banks did not hold security over Mallya’s assets and that the bankruptcy petition was correct. The court also found that the realisations from assets attached by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) were conditional and did not discharge the debt under English law.
“This is a significant result for the banks. TLT are pleased to have delivered this outcome, having acted for the banks since 2017 in relation to the DRT (Debt Recovery Tribunal) judgment of GBP 1.12 billion, obtained against Dr Mallya,” said Nick Curling, legal director at TLT LLP.
The case dates back to 2017 when the banks registered the DRT’s judgment in the English courts, which pertained to a personal guarantee Mallya had provided in relation to loans made to Kingfisher Airlines. The banks then served Mallya with a bankruptcy petition in September 2018, which he opposed on multiple grounds.
In April 2020, London’s Insolvency & Companies Court (ICC) ruled that the banks held security over Mallya’s assets, rendering the bankruptcy petition partially defective under Section 269 of the Insolvency Act 1986. The banks appealed this finding, and in March 2021 Justice Snowden permitted them to bring the security appeal, which was heard this year and has now been concluded.
In the interim, the banks amended the bankruptcy petition, agreeing they would relinquish any security held if Mallya was declared bankrupt. Mallya had opposed this amendment, arguing it was contrary to Indian law and public policy. However, in April 2021, the ICC ruled that the amendment was not contrary to Indian law or public policy.
“Despite Mallya’s subsequent appeals, including an appeal against the amendment decision and the Bankruptcy Order itself, Sir Anthony Mann sitting as a judge in the High Court delivered a decisive judgment on 9 April 2025. The court allowed the Security Appeal in favour of the banks, refused Mallya’s permission to bring the amendment appeal and the appeal against the bankruptcy order and ultimately upheld the bankruptcy order,” added TLT.
Mallya, who was declared bankrupt in July 2021, is pursuing a separate annulment application in the UK court, which is now scheduled for a directions hearing in October.
“In circumstances where even the (Indian) government confirms that the assets were ‘restored’, it is fanciful to imagine that those recoveries are in any sense conditional. Mallya will, on this basis, pursue with vigour his application to annul the Bankruptcy Order in England in conjunction with proceedings in the Karnataka High Court to compel the banks to provide an accounting and come clean,” said Leigh Crestohl, Mallya’s lawyer at Zaiwalla & Co.
Meanwhile, Mallya remains on bail in the UK while a “confidential” legal matter believed to be related to an asylum application is resolved in connection with the unrelated extradition proceedings.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Allahabad HC sets aside maintenance order in favour of earning wife, says she didn't tell truth
Prayagraj (PTI): The Allahabad High Court has set aside a lower court order mandating a man to pay maintenance to his estranged wife, observing that she earns her living and did not reveal the true salary in her affidavit.
Justice Madan Pal Singh also allowed a criminal revision petition filed by the man, Ankit Saha.
"A perusal of the impugned judgment indicates that in the affidavit filed before the trial court, the opposite party herself admitted that she is a post-graduate and a web designer by qualification. She is working as a senior sales coordinator in a company and getting a salary of Rs 34,000 per month," the court said in the December 3 order.
"But in her cross-examination, she has admitted that she was earning Rs 36,000 per month. Such an amount for a wife who has no other liability cannot be said to be meagre; whereas the man has the responsibility of maintaining his aged parents and other social obligations," it observed.
The high court observed that the woman was not entitled to get any maintenance from her husband "as she is an earning lady and able to maintain herself".
The man's counsel argued in court that the estranged wife did not reveal the whole truth in the affidavit.
"She claimed herself to be an illiterate and unemployed woman. When the document filed by the man was shown to her before the trial court, she admitted her income during cross-examination. Thus, it is clear that she did not come before the trial court with clean hands," the counsel submitted.
The court, in its order, said, "Cases of those litigants who have no regard for the truth and those who indulge in suppressing material facts need to be thrown out of the court."
It impugned the lower court's February 17 judgment and order, passed by the principal judge of a family court in Gautam Buddh Nagar and allowed the criminal revision petition filed by the man.
