- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
Vijay Mallya Seeks Stay On Debt Recovery, Claims Debt Paid More Than Owed

Vijay Mallya Seeks Stay on Debt Recovery, Claims Debt Paid More Than Owed
Fugitive businessman Vijay Mallya has approached the Karnataka High Court to challenge the ongoing debt recovery proceedings against the now-defunct Kingfisher Airlines. Mallya argues that while Kingfisher Airlines accumulated a debt of approximately ₹6,200 crores, the authorities have already recovered the principal debt amount multiple times over.
The petition, filed on February 3, was heard by Justice R. Devdas on Wednesday. Senior Advocate Sajan Poovayya, representing Mallya, informed the court that no interim relief was being sought at this stage, pending the hearing of the respondents.
The court issued notices to the ten banks, one recovery official, and an asset reconstruction company named in Mallya’s petition. The legal challenge was raised against several nationalized and private sector banks, including the State Bank of India and Punjab National
Bank, as well as the asset reconstruction company involved in the recovery process. In the petition, Mallya requested an interim stay on any further recovery actions and asked for a statement of accounts detailing all amounts owed by him, United Breweries Holdings, and other debtors associated with him.
Earlier, Mallya claimed on social media that the banks had already recovered more than twice the ₹6,203 crores debt adjudicated by the Debt Recovery Tribunal, including interest. He also pointed out that Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman had mentioned in the Lok Sabha that properties worth ₹14,131.6 crores, belonging to Mallya, had been returned to public sector banks.
Mallya, who fled to the UK in 2016, faces charges in India for defaulting on massive loans extended to Kingfisher Airlines by several banks.