Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Mseb Holding Co. Ltd vs The Hong Kong And Shanghai Banking ... on 12 January, 2026
Author: Dipankar Datta
Bench: Dipankar Datta
1
ITEM NO.56 COURT NO.7 SECTION IX-A
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Miscellaneous Application No. 2065/2025 in SLP(C) No. 7870/2025
[Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 24-03-2025
in SLP(C) No. No. 7870/2025 passed by the Supreme Court of India]
MSEB HOLDING CO. LTD. & ANR. Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
THE HONG KONG AND SHANGHAI BANKING
CORPORATION LTD. & ORS. Respondent(s)
IA No. 193045/2025 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS
IA No. 303021/2025 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT
WITH
Diary No(s). 69596/2025 (IX-A)
IA No. 313984/2025 - APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION
IA No. 314000/2025 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.
Date : 12-01-2026 These matters were called on for hearing today.
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
For Petitioner(s) :Mr. Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General
Mr. Anjan Dasgupta, Adv.
Ms. Rimali Batra, Adv.
Mr. Chandra Prakash, Adv.
Mr. Abhishek Lalwani, Adv.
Mr. Shivang Gupta, Adv.
M/s D.S.K. Legal, AOR
Mr. Neeraj Kishan Kaul, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Rajendra Barot, Adv.
Mr. Vivek Shetty, Adv.
Ms. Cheryl Fernandes, Adv.
Mr. Ayush Chadha, Adv.
Mr. Naman Nayyar, Adv.
Mr. Toshiv goyal, Adv.
Mr. Varun Tyagi, Adv.
Mr. Abhyudaya Sharma, Adv.
Signature Not Verified
Ms.Alankrita Sinha, Adv.
Mr. Navneet R., AOR
Digitally signed by
JATINDER KAUR
Date: 2026.01.13
17:51:29 IST
Reason:
For Respondent(s) :Mr. Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General
Mr. Anjan Dasgupta, Adv.
Ms. Rimali Batra, Adv.
2
Mr. Chandra Prakash, Adv.
Mr. Abhishek Lalwani, Adv.
Mr. Shivang Gupta, Adv.
M/s D.S.K. Legal, AOR
Mr. Deepak Nargolkar, Sr. Adv.
Ms. Shraddha Dube Patil, Adv.
Ms. Iyer Shruti Gopal, Adv.
Mr. Ang Bajaj, Adv.
Mr. Anirudh Kate, Adv.
Mr. Anandh K, AOR
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
1. The judgment debtors - Maharashtra State Electricity Board Holding Co. Ltd.1 & Anr. - having suffered dismissal of their special leave petition by an order dated 24th March, 2025 of a coordinate bench of this Court was granted time till 31st December, 2025 to vacate the decretal property.
2. An application (IA Diary No. 313984 of 2025) has now been filed by MSEB seeking time till 30th September, 2026 to vacate the decretal property.
3. Such a prayer is seriously resisted by the decree holder - Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation Ltd.2.
4. We have noted that prior to institution of the suit for eviction by the HSBC, out of which the special leave petition arose, the MSEB was given a notice to the extent that it was occupying 14,877 sq. ft. on the third floor and 5349 sq. ft. on the fourth floor of HSBC Building, M.G. Road, Mumbai-400 001.
5. Insofar as these two properties are concerned, there is no dispute that they form part of the decree passed by the High Court, since affirmed by this Court.
6. Since the parties are not ad idem, the question that now arises is: what is the market value of the decretal properties and what is the amount the MSEB would be liable to pay to the HSBC, should its prayer for extension be allowed? 1 MSEB 2 HSBC 3
7. In such view of the matter, we require the Registrar General of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay to have a valuer from the Government panel of valuers appointed for the purpose of valuation of the aforesaid two properties, which are part of HSBC Building, M.G. Road, Mumbai-400 001, and what is the fair rent that such properties could fetch if the same were let out today.
8. On the date of inspection by the valuer, the representatives of the MSEB as well as the HSBC shall be permitted to remain present and to place their versions which shall be duly considered.
9. The report of the valuer shall be submitted before the Registrar General of the High Court, which must reach this Court within a fortnight from date. The expenses of the valuer shall be borne by the MSEB.
10. Insofar as the portion of the fourth floor of HSBC Building ad measuring 9528 sq. ft. is concerned, which allegedly is under the occupation of the State of Maharashtra, we grant liberty to the HSBC to initiate appropriate proceedings, if so advised, in accordance with law for securing possession thereof in terms of the decree passed by the High Court.
11. If any application is made by the HSBC, it shall be open to the State of Maharashtra to resist the same according to law.
12. We also clarify that if any application is made by the HSBC in pursuance of direction no.4 of paragraph 59 of the impugned judgment and order of the High Court, the same shall be taken to its logical conclusion also in accordance with law.
13. Re-list the Miscellaneous Applications on 17th February, 2026 at 03:45 p.m. (JATINDER KAUR) (SUDHIR KUMAR SHARMA) P.S. to REGISTRAR COURT MASTER (NSH)