B.R. Shetty has filed a reported $15 billion suit in the Bombay High Court against Bank of Baroda and 25 others, alleging that the lender helped enable fraud connected to the collapse of his business empire. The claims have not been established by a court. The amount is what Shetty is seeking, not damages awarded.
What the Bombay High Court suit alleges
NDTV Profit reported on October 13, 2026, that Shetty, founder of the NMC healthcare group and UAE Exchange, brought the case against Bank of Baroda and 25 other defendants. The report describes the filing through a summary of the plaint; the plaint itself has not been independently reviewed here. The reported rupee equivalent of the $15 billion claim is Rs 1.44 lakh crore.
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
According to that account, Shetty alleges that the bank facilitated transactions used to divert funds from group companies, disregarded money-laundering alerts, extended unsecured loans and concealed lending exposures from auditors. He also reportedly challenges guarantees said to bear forged signatures. The plaint summary says Shetty had relinquished control of group companies before some disputed credit facilities were issued, and alleges that unauthorized staff operated his personal bank account.
Do these 3 things before closing this tab:
1Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitches2Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errors3Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteThese are allegations made by Shetty in litigation, not findings that the bank or other defendants committed fraud. A lawsuit records claims for a court to consider; filing it does not prove those claims.
#1 Best Overall
How the reported $15 billion claim is structured
NDTV Profit’s account says the suit seeks $5 billion each in direct and consequential damages from defendants jointly and severally, plus 18% annual interest, and an additional $5 billion from Bank of Baroda for alleged reputational and goodwill losses. In that description, the three $5 billion amounts add up to the reported $15 billion total.
This is a report of the pleading’s requested relief, not a court-verified breakdown or an award. The precise legal construction should be checked against the filed plaint before treating each component as definitive. The requested interest is likewise a claim in the suit, not an amount the court has ordered paid.
Rank #2
- Keep track of everything from attendance to test scores
- Spiral bound
- Measures 8-1/2" x 11"
Bank of Baroda’s separate settlement with NMC entities
In a July 2, 2026 exchange disclosure, Bank of Baroda said it had settled claims brought by the joint administrators of NMC Health PLC, NMC Healthcare Ltd and NMC Holding Ltd for $600 million, approximately Rs 5,700 crore. The bank said those claims were resolved without admission of liability or wrongdoing, and that the agreement’s other terms were confidential.
Quick wins for a faster PC:
Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitchesFind Drivers →Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →That settlement concerns claims by NMC entities and their administrators against the bank. It is distinct from Shetty’s reported Bombay suit. It is not an admission by the bank, nor does it establish the allegations Shetty makes in his case. The amounts also have different legal meanings: $600 million was the disclosed settlement amount, while $15 billion is what Shetty reportedly seeks in damages.
How the related court proceedings differ
The bank’s disclosure identified proceedings in the Abu Dhabi Global Market (ADGM) Court of First Instance and the High Court of Justice in England and Wales. It said the ADGM trial began on March 23, 2026, and the English proceedings had been stayed pending the ADGM outcome.
A July 9 update from Fountain Court Chambers, counsel for the NMC parties, said the ADGM trial ran for 15 weeks from March to July, and that the settlement with the bank occurred during closing arguments. It reported that claims against Shetty and Prasanth Manghat continued, the trial concluded on July 3, and judgment was reserved. That update describes the position at the time; it does not confirm whether a judgment has since been issued.
Those proceedings concern a different set of claims and parties from the new suit in Mumbai. In particular, the reported continuation of claims against Shetty and Manghat after the bank settlement should not be read as a ruling on Shetty’s allegations against Bank of Baroda.
The earlier New York case is not this lawsuit
Shetty’s new Bombay case should also be kept separate from a 2024 New York action. Bar and Bench reported that a New York state court dismissed that separate $8 billion lawsuit, which Shetty and Neopharma had brought against banks, auditors and others. That report does not establish the legal effect of the dismissal on the Bombay suit, which is a separate case with its own parties and claims.
| Matter | Reported amount | What the figure represents |
|---|---|---|
| Bombay High Court suit, reported October 13, 2026 | $15 billion | Damages sought by Shetty, not awarded damages |
| Bank of Baroda settlement with NMC entities, disclosed July 2, 2026 | $600 million | Settlement; the bank said it involved no admission of liability or wrongdoing |
| Separate New York action, reported in 2024 | $8 billion | Amount claimed in the earlier action reported dismissed |
What is established—and what remains unresolved
The available reporting establishes that a $15 billion claim has been reported as filed, and that Bank of Baroda separately disclosed a $600 million settlement with NMC entities and their administrators. It does not establish that the Bombay court has accepted Shetty’s allegations, ruled on liability or awarded damages. The new suit’s exact filing date and case number, a direct account of the plaint, and any response from Bank of Baroda were not available in the reports summarized here.
The distinction matters: a reported claim, a settlement with different plaintiffs, and a court judgment are not interchangeable. The July 2026 report said the ADGM judgment was reserved at that point, so the later status of those proceedings cannot be inferred from that update alone.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
