In the BR Shetty Bank of Baroda suit, the NMC Healthcare founder seeks $15 billion in the Bombay High Court on allegations that the bank enabled fund diversion at the NMC group. The bank says it has not been served.
Mumbai: NMC Healthcare founder Bavaguthu Raghuram (BR) Shetty has asked the Bombay High Court for $15 billion in damages from state-owned Bank of Baroda and 25 other defendants. His civil suit alleges that the bank and former NMC executives enabled the diversion of funds and the concealment of liabilities that led to the group’s collapse, and that the bank later pursued him on guarantees bearing forged signatures [BR Shetty v. Bank of Baroda and Others].
No Bench has heard the suit or passed any order in it. Everything described below is Mr Shetty’s case as pleaded in his plaint. None of it has been tested in court, and the bank and the other defendants have yet to file replies.
The bank’s first response
Bank of Baroda reacted in a stock exchange filing on October 14. It said it had seen media coverage of the suit but had not been served with it, and that it could not comment on pleadings not tested in court. If and when served, it said, it would “defend the suit firmly and take all necessary steps to protect its interests.”
ALSO READ: Great Reputational Matter for Us: Harish Salve to Represent Bank of Baroda in Abu Dhabi Trial
How the $15 billion is built up
The claim has three limbs. Mr Shetty seeks $5 billion in direct damages and another $5 billion in consequential damages, including lost business opportunities, jointly and severally from every defendant. A further $5 billion is claimed from Bank of Baroda alone for reputational harm and loss of goodwill, along with interest at 18% a year.
Of the 26 defendants, one is the bank, 10 are its officers, and others are former NMC and UAE Exchange executives Prasanth Manghat and Promoth Manghat and their associates. Two companies, Avitis Super Speciality Hospitals and SMARD Building Solutions, are also named. Mr Shetty alleges that some of the named individuals hold assets acquired with diverted funds.
The allegations against the bank
The plaint says Bank of Baroda ignored repeated anti-money laundering alerts, lent without adequate security, and routed money through supplier accounts allegedly used for round-tripping. Mr Shetty also alleges that the bank hid its lending exposure from NMC’s auditors, claiming that of 15 balance confirmations prepared for the auditor EY, only 11 reached it, and that some bank officials accepted gifts and overlooked warning signs.
As to his own part, Mr Shetty says he gave up control of the group companies in 2012 and stepped down as chief executive in March 2017. He claims he found out only in early 2020 that he was still NMC’s chairman, and resigned after that. According to him, former executives used forged instructions and signatures to move money through personal and corporate accounts so that it would look as if he were involved.
From a London listing to administration
NMC Health, founded by Mr Shetty, was among the largest private healthcare providers in the UAE and was listed on the London Stock Exchange. In late 2019, short-seller Muddy Waters questioned its financial statements and debt disclosures. The company later disclosed billions of dollars in previously unreported borrowings and went into administration in 2020.
NMC Healthcare and NMC Holding, both in administration, and their joint administrators sued Mr Shetty, former chief executive Prasanth Manghat and Bank of Baroda before the Abu Dhabi Global Market (ADGM) Courts, where the trial began on March 23, 2026. A parallel case in England was stayed pending the ADGM outcome. In July 2026 the bank settled the ADGM litigation for $600 million, disclosing in a July 2 exchange filing that the settlement was “without any admission of liability or wrongdoing by the bank.” It said it settled to avoid prolonged litigation, continuing uncertainty and further legal costs.
Next steps
The suit will come up once it is listed and the defendants have been served. Bank of Baroda and the other defendants are entitled to contest every allegation in the plaint, and the court has expressed no view on the merits of any claim.
Case Title: BR Shetty v. Bank of Baroda and Others (title and number not reported)
Case No.: Not reported
Court: Bombay High Court
Status: Suit filed; not yet heard; Bank of Baroda says it has not been served