Supreme Court of India

KISHOR N SHAH VS. URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE TRUSTEES LTD on 27 October 2026

Cites 0, Cited by 0

ITEM NO.54 COURT NO.11 SECTION IX

S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 36900/2026

[Arising out of impugned judgment and order dated 29-09-2026 in IA

No. 1144/2021 in Commercial Execution Application No.194/2020

passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay]

KISHOR N SHAH & ORS. Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE TRUSTEES LTD & ORS. Respondent(s)

(FOR ADMISSION)

Date : 27-10-2026 This petition was called on for hearing today.

CORAM :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.V. VISWANATHAN

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN PALLI

For Petitioner(s) :

Mr. Niranjan Reddy, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Mukul Rohatgi, Sr. Adv.

Ms. Nina R. Nariman, Adv.

Mr. Kunal Vajani, Adv.

Ms. Ruby Singh Ahuja, Adv.

Mr. Rohan Dakshini, Adv.

Ms. Etika Srivastava, Adv.

Mr. Devang Kumar, Adv.

Ms. Abhyarthana Singh, Adv.

Ms. Aanchal Maheshwari, Adv.

Mr. Tribhuvan Narain Singh, Adv.

Mr. Keshav Sehgal, Adv.

Ms. Jayam Singh Chauhan, Adv.

Ms. Aasawari Deshmukh, Adv.

Mr. Yashasvee, Adv.

For M/S. Karanjawala & Co.- 1707, AOR

For Respondent(s) :

Mr. Neeraj Kishan Kaul, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Amarjit Singh Bedi, Adv.

Ms. Surekha Raman, Adv.

Mr. Aditya Mehta, Adv.

Mr. Shreyash Kumar, Adv.

Mr. Sidharth Nair, Adv.

Mr. Harshit Singh, Adv.

Mr. Yashwant Sanjenbam, Adv.

For M/S. K J John And Co- 1287, AOR

Digitally signed by

ANITA MALHOTRA

Date: 2026.10.28

19:00:22 IST

Reason:

Signature Not Verified

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

Cited by

0

Decisions in the index citing it

Cites

0

Decisions referred to

In this index

0

Of the decisions it cites

Overruled / Questioned

0

No negative treatment found

Loading the citing and cited decisions…

O R D E R

1. Heard Mr. S.Niranjan Reddy, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners.

2. We are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order in exercise of our powers under Article 136 of the Constitution of India. The order makes it clear that the Court has stopped short of issuing a warrant and has asked the petitioners to show cause.

3. The Special Leave Petition is, accordingly, dismissed.

4. Pending application, if any, shall stand disposed of. (ANITA MALHOTRA) (NIKITA SINGH) DEPUTY REGISTRAR COURT MASTER

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead