Premier Textile Processors vs Shree Naman Developers Private Limited — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Premier Textile Processors vs Shree Naman Developers Private Limited — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Interim compliance directions: residual amount as of December 1, 2025 topped up for sales until January 1, 2026 to be covered by a bank guarantee or fixed deposit as directed by the Learned Arbitral Tribunal no later than January 7, 2026; compliance reporting listed on January 8, 2026 with alleged contemnors to remain present; detailed statement on the status of the 16 remaining units to be filed by the next date.

Issue for consideration

Whether the alleged contemnors have secured the amounts directed, and what further security (bank guarantee or fixed deposit) must cover the residual amount as of December 1, 2025 topped up for sales until January 1, 2026, and by when. +1 more

Court's answer

Directed that the residual amount as of December 1, 2025, topped up further for sales until January 1, 2026, be covered by provision of a bank guarantee or a fixed deposit as directed by the Learned Arbitral Tribunal, no later than January 7, 2026.

Ratio / Principle

Matter listed for reporting compliance on January 8, 2026; the alleged contemnors directed to remain present on the next date.

Key takeaways

A detailed statement recording the status of the 16 remaining units left for sale is to be provided by the next date.ratio¶¶19
The amount to be deposited before the next date is to cover all sales effected until January 1, 2026.ratio¶¶19
Matter stood over under the caption For Reporting Compliance; the printed date reads January 8, 2025, whereas paragraph 4 records the compliance listing as January 8, 2026 (discrepancy preserved as printed).ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction), Somasekhar Sundaresan, J., in Contempt Petition No. 39 of 2025 in Arbitration Petition No. 339 of 2024 (Premier Textile Processors v. Shree Naman Developers Private Limited): recording that a Fixed Deposit of Rs.75 crore with lien in favour of the Prothonotary and Senior Master was created by December 1, 2025, a further Fixed Deposit taking the aggregate to Rs.93.55 crores was being completed, and a bank guarantee facility was assigned to bridge a residual gap of Rs.64 crores, the Court noted that despite the Section 17 order of January 4, 2025 having survived a Section 37 challenge and a Supreme Court challenge, only a fraction of the amount stood secured. The Court directed that the residual amount as of December 1, 2025, topped up for sales until January 1, 2026, be covered by a bank guarantee or fixed deposit as directed by the Learned Arbitral Tribunal no later than January 7, 2026; listed the matter for reporting compliance on January 8, 2026; required the alleged contemnors to remain present; and called for a detailed statement on the 16 units remaining for sale.

26-CONP-39-2025.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 39 OF 2025 IN

ARBITRATION PETITION NO. 339 OF 2024

Premier Textile Processors …Petitioner

Versus

Shree Naman Developers Private Limited …Respondent

Mr. Gaurav Joshi, Senior Counsel, for the Petitioner. Mr. Simil Purohit, Senior Counsel, for Respondent.

CORAM : SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, J. DATE : DECEMBER 5, 2025

ORDER :

Digitally signed byASHWINI ASHWINIJANARDANVALLAKATI JANARDANVALLAKATIDate: 2025.12.08 15:07:42 +0530

Learned Senior Counsel on behalf of the alleged contemnor s submits that a Fixed Deposit in the sum of Rs.75 crore, with a lien marked in favour of the Prothonotary and Senior Master has been created by December 1, 2025. He has further instructions to state that a further Fixed Deposit for the balance sum, taking the aggregate of the fixed deposit amount to Rs.93.55 crores, is being completed today. Further, he submits that the alleged contemnors are securing a bank guarantee and have been assigned a bank guarantee facility to be able to bridge the residual gap of Rs.64 crores and seeks six weeks’ time to effect the same.

Page 1 of 3 December 5, 2025

Ashwini Vallakati

26-CONP-39-2025.doc

Considering the background of this matter, i.e. that the Section 17 order had been passed way back on January 4, 2025 after which a challenge under Section 37 and the subsequent challenge before the Supreme Court have all failed, and that we are now in December 2025, only a fraction of the amount involved has been secured.

A chart setting out the computation of the amount is tendered across the bar, marked ‘X’ for identification and is taken on record.

Considering the earnest request by Learned Senior Advocate on behalf of the alleged contemnor, it is directed that the residual amount as of December 1, 2025 topped up further for sales until January 1, 2026 shall also be covered by the provision of a bank guarantee or a fixed deposit as directed by the Learned Arbitral Tribunal no later than January 7, 2026. List for reporting compliance on January 8, 2026. The alleged contemnors shall remain present on the next date.

Learned Senior Advocate for the alleged contemnors, on instructions, submits that only 16 more units are left for sale. By the next date, a detailed statement recording the status of such 16 units shall also be provided. As stated earlier, the amount to be deposited before the next date should cover all sales effected until January 1, 2026.

Page 2 of 3 December 5, 2025

Ashwini Vallakati

26-CONP-39-2025.doc

Stand over to January 8, 2025 under the caption “ For Reporting Compliance ”.

All actions required to be taken pursuant to this order shall be taken upon receipt of a downloaded copy as available on this Court’s website.

[ SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, J.]

Page 3 of 3 December 5, 2025

Ashwini Vallakati