The conclusion of a high-value financial default involving Nitin J Sandesara has drawn attention to the scale and completeness of the settlement, with payments of ₹9,800 crore.
The case, which originated from a reference amount of ₹5,383 crore, was formally closed in April after the Supreme Court recorded that all financial obligations had been fulfilled and no substantive issues remained pending.
Sonam Chandwani, Managing Partner, KS Legal and Associates, said courts in India can, in principle, take cognisance of a settlement framework akin to the Sandesara resolution as a pragmatic mechanism to address large, long pending default, but such consideration is neither automatic nor unqualified.
While a Sandesara-like settlement may be judicially recognised as a tool to unlock value and expedite resolution, courts would cautiously balance equitable relief for debtors, ensuring that such precedents do not erode the integrity of the credit ecosystem, she said.
The Sandesara brothers were accused of taking large loans from banks and fleeing the country in 2017.
Banks indicated that they could proceed with recovery of their dues through this settlement.
According to details placed on record, ₹3,507 crore was paid directly to a consortium of lender banks, while ₹1,192 crore was realised through asset liquidation. In addition, ₹5,111 crore was deposited as part of proceedings before the Supreme Court.
Following the completion of payments, the Court approved a full and final settlement and ordered the closure of all related proceedings.
Cases handled by agencies including the Central Bureau of Investigation, the Enforcement Directorate, and the Serious Fraud Investigation Office were brought to a close.
The court observed that, with obligations fulfilled and no issues remaining, continuation of proceedings would serve no further purpose.
By the final stage of the proceedings, only a marginal balance remained, which was subsequently cleared, completing all requirements under the settlement framework.
In the context of India’s banking system, large-value cases have often involved extended timelines and partial recoveries.
The present case differs in that the total payments exceeded the original reference amount and resulted in full settlement.
The conclusion of the matter provides an instance of complete financial closure in a complex case involving multiple agencies and regulatory processes.
Published on April 29, 2026