Vijay Mallya challenges banks over alleged excess loan recovery in Karnataka High Court

Fugitive businessman Vijay Mallya has approached the Karnataka High Court, seeking details of loan recoveries made by banks. Senior advocate Sajan Poovayya represented Mallya in the case.

Mallya’s legal counsel argued that while ₹6,200 crore was originally due, banks have recovered ₹14,000 crore. Referring to statements made by Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman in the Lok Sabha, the counsel contended that the debt had been fully cleared, yet recovery efforts were still ongoing. They requested the court to direct banks to provide a statement detailing the recovered amount.

Acting on Mallya’s petition, a High Court bench led by Justice R Devadas issued notices to banks and loan recovery officers.

Currently residing in London, Mallya remains the subject of India's extradition efforts over alleged loan defaults. On December 18, 2024, he had publicly stated that banks had recovered ₹14,131.60 crore from him against a judgment debt of ₹6,203 crore, yet he continued to be labeled an economic offender. Taking to social media platform X, Mallya questioned the legality of banks and the Enforcement Directorate (ED) recovering more than twice the owed amount and asserted his right to seek relief.

The Finance Minister, during a recent parliamentary debate on Supplementary Demands for Grants, had detailed major economic offence cases where the ED had attached assets. She revealed that the agency had restored properties worth ₹22,280 crore, with ₹14,131.60 crore from Mallya being handed over to public sector banks. Despite this, Mallya insists that the recovery surpasses the debt adjudicated by the Debt Recovery Tribunal, which included ₹1,200 crore in interest. He maintains that unless authorities can justify the excess recovery, he has grounds for legal recourse.

The case in the Karnataka High Court adds a new dimension to the long-standing legal battle between Mallya and Indian financial institutions, as he continues to challenge his status as an economic offender.

(With ANI inputs)