Changeflow GovPing Courts & Legal Shriram Finance Ltd vs. Namdeo Paulad Patil - L...
Priority review Enforcement Amended Final

Shriram Finance Ltd vs. Namdeo Paulad Patil - Leave to Appeal

Favicon for indiankanoon.org India Bombay High Court
Filed March 23rd, 2026
Detected March 24th, 2026
Email

Summary

The Bombay High Court is hearing applications for leave to appeal an acquittal order under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The court has deferred the hearing pending a decision from the Supreme Court on a related matter concerning the appropriate forum for such appeals.

What changed

The Bombay High Court, Bench at Aurangabad, is considering multiple applications for leave to appeal orders of acquittal under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The primary issue before the court is the correct appellate forum, with a respondent arguing, based on a Supreme Court decision in Celestium Financial v. Ganasekaran, that appeals should lie before the District and Sessions Court. The applicant, however, points to a pending Supreme Court referral in M/s Everest Automobiles v. M/s. Rajit Enterprises regarding the complainant's standing as a victim under Section 372 of the Cr.P.C., urging a stay on proceedings until that larger bench decision.

Parties have agreed to defer the hearing of these leave to appeal applications until the Supreme Court renders its decision on the referenced matters. This means that the immediate compliance or procedural steps for the parties involved are to await further direction from the court after the Supreme Court's ruling. The court has explicitly stated that all points on merits remain open for consideration after the stay is lifted, indicating that the substantive arguments of the case will be addressed at a later stage.

What to do next

  1. Await Supreme Court decision on the appropriate forum for appeals under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
  2. Prepare to re-argue leave to appeal applications once the Supreme Court decision is rendered.

Source document (simplified)

Select the following parts of the judgment
| Precedent Analysis | Court's Reasoning |
| Conclusion | |
For entire doc: Unmark Mark

## Unlock Advanced Research with PRISM AI

Integrated with over 4 crore judgments and laws — designed for legal practitioners, researchers, students and institutions

Shriram Finance Ltd Formerly Shriram ... vs Namdeo Paulad Patil on 23 March, 2026

-1-
59-ALP-117-2025

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                   BENCH AT AURANGABAD

     APPLN. FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL BY PVT. PARTY NO. 117 OF 2025

SHRIRAM FINANCE LTD (FORMERLY SHRIRAM CITY UNION FINANCE
LTD) THR. PRAVIN KISHOR KASAB
VERSUS
NAMDEO PAULAD PATIL
......
Advocate for Appellant : Mr. Vinod Y. Bhide
Advocate for Respondent : Mr. Ujwal Patil
......

                         WITH
 APPLN. FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL BY PVT. PARTY NO. 86 OF 2025
                         WITH
 APPLN. FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL BY PVT. PARTY NO. 89 OF 2025
                         WITH
 APPLN. FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL BY PVT. PARTY NO. 81 OF 2025
                         WITH
 APPLN. FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL BY PVT. PARTY NO. 85 OF 2025
                         WITH
 APPLN. FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL BY PVT. PARTY NO. 82 OF 2025
                          ......

                          CORAM : ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J. DATED : 23 MARCH 2026

PER COURT :

  1. The instant application has been preferred seeking leave to

file an appeal against the order of acquittal from offence under [Section

138](https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1823824/) of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

  1. This matter was earlier heard and kept for today on a court

query.

59-ALP-117-2025

  1. Learned counsel Shri Ujwal Patil for respondent submits

that, in view of the recent decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in

Celestium Financial v. Ganasekaran Etc. [(2025) SCC OnLine SC 1320],

the appeal lies before learned District and Sessions Court and not before

this Court.

  1. Learned counsel Shri Vinod Bhide for applicant pointed out

that, in the above judgment there is no mandate to approach Sessions

Court. However, he further pointed out that, recently the Hon'ble Apex

Court in the case of M/s Everest Automobiles v. M/s. Rajit Enterprises in

Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.12350 of 2024, on the issue

whether complainant in 138 N.I. Act, can be said to be victim so as to

avail remedy of 372 of Cr.P.C., has referred the said case to larger Bench

and therefore he urges that till decision of larger Bench of Hon'ble Apex

Court, this matter may be kept in abeyance by keeping all points on

merits open. He placed on record a copy of the order passed in SLP (Crl.)

No.12350 of 2024 for ready reference.

  1. Learned counsel for respondent also agreed to the same.

Resultantly, present leave to file appeal shall be heard after decision of

proposed larger Bench and parties shall be at liberty to move the Court

for circulation of ALP thereafter.

(ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.)

Tandale

Named provisions

Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act

Source

Analysis generated by AI. Source diff and links are from the original.

Classification

Agency
GP
Filed
March 23rd, 2026
Instrument
Enforcement
Legal weight
Binding
Stage
Final
Change scope
Substantive
Document ID
59-ALP-117-2025

Who this affects

Applies to
Legal professionals
Activity scope
Appeals
Geographic scope
IN IN

Taxonomy

Primary area
Judicial Administration
Operational domain
Legal
Topics
Appeals Negotiable Instruments

Get Courts & Legal alerts

Weekly digest. AI-summarized, no noise.

Free. Unsubscribe anytime.

Get alerts for this source

We'll email you when India Bombay High Court publishes new changes.

Free. Unsubscribe anytime.