What’s actually slowing this PC down?
Pick the symptom - the matching free tool is one click away.
iTechGuides is reader-supported. When you buy through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. Learn more
B.R. Shetty has filed a reported $15 billion suit in the Bombay High Court against Bank of Baroda and 25 others, alleging that the lender helped enable fraud connected to the collapse of his business empire. The allegations have not been established by a court, and the available account of the case is based on a summary of the plaint rather than an independently reviewed court filing.
What Shetty is seeking
NDTV Profit reported on October 13, 2026, that Shetty, identified as the founder of NMC healthcare group and UAE Exchange, is seeking about $15 billion, or approximately Rs 1.44 lakh crore. The report describes the claim as including $5 billion each in direct and consequential damages against the defendants jointly and severally, plus a further $5 billion from Bank of Baroda for alleged losses to Shetty’s reputation and goodwill. It also says the plaint seeks interest at 18% per annum.
![The Law of Financial Institutions [Connected eBook] (Aspen Casebook)](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/31aJ2m4em4L._SL160_.jpg)
Those figures are the report’s description of what the suit requests, not damages awarded by a court. Because the plaint itself was not independently reviewed, the exact legal construction of the reported breakdown should not be treated as verified from the court record.
What the suit reportedly alleges
According to NDTV Profit’s account of the plaint, Shetty accuses Bank of Baroda of facilitating transactions used to divert funds from group companies, ignoring money-laundering alerts, extending unsecured loans and concealing lending exposures from auditors. The suit reportedly also disputes guarantees bearing signatures alleged to be forged.
#1 Best Overall
The account says Shetty claims he had relinquished control of group companies before some of the disputed credit facilities were granted, and that unauthorized bank staff operated his personal account. These are allegations attributed to the lawsuit, not findings about what the bank, Shetty or other defendants did.
- Not a court finding: The reported claims about diverted funds, alerts, lending, disclosures and guarantees remain unproven in the information available about this filing.
- Filing details remain limited: The case number, exact filing date, the plaint itself and any response from Bank of Baroda were not available in the reporting summarized here.
How this differs from Bank of Baroda’s NMC settlement
Bank of Baroda separately disclosed on July 2, 2026, that it had settled claims with the joint administrators of NMC Health PLC, NMC Healthcare Ltd and NMC Holding Ltd for $600 million, approximately Rs 5,700 crore. The bank said the claims between those NMC parties and the bank were resolved without admission of liability or wrongdoing; other settlement terms were confidential. That settlement is not an admission of Shetty’s separate allegations, nor does its amount establish the value or merits of his Bombay suit.
Rank #2
The bank’s disclosure identified proceedings in the Abu Dhabi Global Market (ADGM) Court of First Instance and the High Court of Justice in England and Wales. It said the ADGM trial began on March 23, 2026, and that the English proceedings had been stayed pending the ADGM outcome.
What was reported about the ADGM case
In an update dated July 9, 2026, Fountain Court Chambers, counsel for NMC parties, said the ADGM trial had run for 15 weeks from March to July and that the bank settlement occurred during closing arguments. It reported that claims against Shetty and Prasanth Manghat continued, the trial concluded on July 3, and judgment was reserved. That is the status reported at that time; it does not establish whether a judgment has since been issued.
The separate New York lawsuit
Shetty’s Bombay case should also be kept distinct from a separate $8 billion action he and Neopharma filed in New York in 2024 against banks, auditors and others. Bar and Bench reported that the New York state court dismissed that action. The report does not establish the legal effect of that dismissal on the current Indian suit, which is a separate proceeding with different reported details.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.What is established—and what is not
The reported development is that Shetty has brought a substantial claim in Bombay seeking compensation from Bank of Baroda and 25 others. The allegations and requested damages are not court-established facts or an award. The separate $600 million settlement was disclosed by the bank on a no-admission basis, while the July 2026 update described continuing ADGM claims against Shetty and Manghat with judgment reserved then. These proceedings involve distinct parties, claims and procedural positions; one should not be read as deciding the merits of another.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
