Idbi Trusteeship Services Limited vs Ozone Infra Con Private Limited — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Idbi Trusteeship Services Limited vs Ozone Infra Con Private Limited — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Interlocutory procedural directions only (matter stood over, not finally disposed): Office to issue fresh notice to respondent no.3 at the fresh address, returnable after four weeks, with notice stating that if respondent no.3 absents himself despite service the contempt petition will be heard finally in his absence; petitioner permitted to amend the petition to add respondent no.3's address and at liberty to serve the order copy by private notice; respondent no.3 directed to be personally present and respondent no.2 to remain personally present on the next date; re-verification dispensed with; stand over to 16 March 2026.

Ratio / Principle

Office to issue a fresh notice to respondent no.3 on the fresh (last known) address, returnable after four weeks.

Key takeaways

The fresh notice shall indicate that if respondent no.3 is not present despite service, the contempt petition shall be heard finally in his absence.ratio¶41
Re-verification of the petition is dispensed with.ratio¶40
Respondent no.3 is directed to remain present before the court on the next date; Office to issue notice along with a copy of this order.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Interlocutory procedural order, High Court of Judicature at Bombay (Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction), Gauri Godse J., 16 February 2026, in Contempt Petition No. 24 of 2024 preferred by IDBI Trusteeship Services Limited (Petitioner/Plaintiff) in Commercial Suit No. 18 of 2022 against Ozone Infra Con Private Limited and others. None appeared for respondent no.3; the Office is to issue a fresh notice to respondent no.3 at his last known address (to be supplied by respondent no.2, who was present in court), returnable after four weeks, the notice to record that if respondent no.3 is absent despite service the contempt petition will be heard finally in his absence. The petitioner may amend the petition to add respondent no.3's address and may serve the order copy with a private notice in addition to the court notice. Respondent no.3 is directed to be personally present, and respondent no.2 to remain personally present, on the next date. Re-verification is dispensed with. Earlier, the contempt notice stood served on respondent no.3 and, by order dated 13 January 2025, his presence was recorded and he was exempted from personal appearance until otherwise directed to remain present. Counsel for respondent no.4 sought time to file Vakalatnama and affidavit-in-reply. Matter stood over to 16 March 2026. No statutory provision or precedent is cited and no substantive issue is decided.

20-cpcd-24-2024-coms-18-2022.doc

varsha

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 24 OF 2024

IN

COMMERCIAL SUIT NO. 18 OF 2022

WITH

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2750 OF 2024

WITH

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3450 OF 2022

WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3454 OF 2022

IDBI Trusteeship Services Limited … Petitioner/Plaintiff

vs.

Digitally signed by VARSHA VARSHA VIJAY VIJAY RAJGURU RAJGURU Date:2026.02.17 14:56:58 +0530

Ozone Infra Con Private Limited … Defendant

WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 8244 OF 2025

IN

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2750 OF 2024

WITH

COMMERCIAL SUIT NO. 18 OF 2022

Ozone Infra Con Private Limited … Applicant IN THE MATTER BETWEEN IDBI Trusteeship Services Limited … Plaintiff

vs.

Ozone Infra Con Private Limited … Defendant

Mr. Ashish Kamat, Senior Advocate a/w. Mr. Aniruddh Gambhir, Mr. Pushkar Deo i/b. Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas for the Applicant/Petitioner.

Page no. 1 of 3

20-cpcd-24-2024-coms-18-2022.doc

Mr. Simil Purohit, Senior Advocate a/w. Mr. Renjith Nair and Mr. Abhishek Mookherjee i/b. Mr. Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas and Co., for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2.

Mr. Sathyamoorthy Vasudevan, Respondent No.2 and representative of Respondent No.1, present in court. Mrs. V.N. Worlikar, S.O, Court Receiver office.

Mr. R. Manjunath Director of Respondent No.4 present.

Ms. Priyanka Desai a/w. Ms. Tvisha Desai and Mr. Abhishek Kamble i/b. The Fort Circle, Advocates and Solicitors for Respondent No.4.

CORAM : GAURI GODSE, J. DATED : 16^th FEBRUARY 2026

ORDER:

CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 24 OF 2024

Learned counsel appears for respondent no.4, and she seeks time to file Vakalatnama and affidavit-in-reply.

None appears for respondent no.3. Issue notice to respondent no.3, returnable after four weeks.

Respondent no. 2 is present in court. Learned counsel for respondent no.2 submits that he shall provide the last known address of respondent no.3. The address shall be handed over to

the court associate during the course of the day. The petitioner is permitted to amend the petition to add the address of respondent

Page no. 2 of 3

20-cpcd-24-2024-coms-18-2022.doc

no.3.

4. Re-verification is dispensed with.

Office shall issue a fresh notice to respondent no.3 on the fresh address returnable after four weeks. The notice shall indicate that despite service if respondent no.3 is not present, the contempt petition shall be heard finally in the absence of respondent no.3. As per the record contempt notice is already served upon respondent no.3. His presence was recorded in order dated 13^th January 2025 and he was exempted from personal appearance until and otherwise, directed to remain present.

It is directed that respondent no.3 shall remain present before the court on the next date. Office shall issue notice along with a copy of this order.

In addition to the court notice, the petitioner is at liberty to serve a copy of this order to respondent no.3 along with the private notice.

It is clarified that even respondent no.2 shall remain present personally on the next date.

Stand over to 16^th March 2026.

(GAURI GODSE, J.)

Page no. 3 of 3