Disposed

Aditya Birla Finance Limited v. M/S Ninaniya Estate Ltd. and Ors.

Delhi HC16 Sept 2025O.M.P.(I) (COMM.)/271/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought substitution under Order XXII Rule 10 CPC after assigning its debt to UV Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd pursuant to SARFAESI Act. Substitution was allowed for the limited purpose of the petition, after which the substituted petitioner withdrew the petition with liberty to assert rights in other forums.

What did the court decide?

Substitution allowed; petition disposed of as withdrawn with liberty to assert rights in accordance with law in different forums.

Aditya Birla Finance Limited Vs M/S Ninaniya Estate Ltd. and Ors. — Arbitration | Delhi HC (2025)

¶1

$~71

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 271/2024

¶4

ADITYA BIRLA FINANCE LIMITED .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Ms. Sanjukta Roy, Advocate.

¶6

versus

¶7

M/S NINANIYA ESTATE LTD AND ORS .....Respondents Through: Mr. Sonal Anand, Mr. Aayush Sai and Ms. Surbhi Singh, Advocates.

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH

¶10

O R D E R

¶11

% 16.09.2025

¶12

I.A. 17199/2025

¶13

This application is filed on behalf of Petitioner under Order XXII Rule 10 read with Section 151 CPC seeking substitution of the Petitioner in place of the current Petitioner, namely, Aditya Birla Finance Limited.

¶14

It is stated in the application that the substitution is necessitated on account of the fact that pursuant to Section 5(3) and other relevant provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Finance Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (‘SARFAESI Act’), Petitioner has unconditionally and irrevocably assigned its debt due from the Respondents with all rights, title and interest arising out of and in relation to such debt including without limitation, all underlying security interests and guarantees in favour of the Petitioner herein. Amended memo of parties has also been placed on record.

¶15

Having gone through the application and for the reasons stated

¶16

O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 271/2024

¶17

Page 1 of 2

¶18

This is a digitally signed order.

¶19

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 18/09/2025 at 12:24:07

¶20

therein, the same is allowed substituting the present Petitioner/Aditya Birla Finance Limited with the applicant namely, UV Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd.

¶21

It is made clear that this substitution is for the limited purpose of the present petition and as and when steps are taken by the Petitioner to seek substitution in any other forum, it will be open to the Respondents to raise objection(s), in accordance with law.

¶22

Application is disposed of.

¶23

Next date of hearing before the Joint Registrar (Judicial) on 14.11.2025 is cancelled.

¶24

O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 271/2024

¶25

Amended memo of parties is taken on record.

¶26

Counsel for the substituted Petitioner, on instructions, seeks to withdraw this petition with liberty to assert rights in accordance with law against the Respondents in different forums.

¶27

The petition is disposed of as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for in accordance with law.

¶28

It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and all rights and contentions of the respective parties are left open.

¶29

JYOTI SINGH, J

¶30

SEPTEMBER 16, 2025 Ch

¶31

O.M.P.(I) (COMM.) 271/2024

¶32

Page 2 of 2

¶33

This is a digitally signed order.

¶34

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 18/09/2025 at 12:24:07

Aditya Birla Finance Limited v. M/S Ninaniya Estate Ltd. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aditya Birla Finance Limited v. M/S Ninaniya Estate Ltd. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Himalayan Hygienic Food and Drinks Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. Vs Bevtek L.L.P

Ikramuddin Vs Rahisuddin

S B Protech Private Limited Vs Dlf Limited

Iifl Home Finance Ltd. Vs Bhim Singh & Anr.

Uttar Pradesh Rajkiya Nirman Nigam Ltd. Vs Employees State Insurance Corporation Ltd.

M/S Caspian India Engicon Pvt. Ltd. Vs M/S Sterlite Technologies Limited