Vijay Mallya’s long-running financial and legal troubles have taken another turn, with an SBI-led consortium of banks telling the Bombay High Court that nearly ₹8,752 crore is still recoverable from the businessman.
The lenders said ₹8,751.86 crore remained outstanding as of August 31, excluding legal and other expenses. Their latest submission directly challenges Mallya’s contention that banks have already recovered more than what he owed.
The issue has emerged in proceedings linked to Mallya’s plea seeking to quash the money laundering case against him. The former chairman of United Breweries and founder of the now-defunct Kingfisher Airlines has maintained that the recovery of assets by lenders effectively settled his financial obligations.
The banks, however, have presented a different picture before the court.
According to the latest affidavit, a debt recovery officer has so far “temporarily recovered” ₹10,270 crore under a bond undertaking provided by the consortium. Another ₹544.58 crore was recovered before the lenders filed their suit before the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT).
At first glance, the figures may appear contradictory. If more than ₹10,000 crore has been recovered while another ₹8,752 crore remains due, the key issue is how the recovery figures are treated under the outstanding recovery certificate.
The lenders have argued that the amount recovered cannot be viewed in isolation from the liabilities that continue to accrue. They maintain that substantial sums remain legally recoverable, including subsequent interest and other amounts covered by the recovery proceedings.
The latest figure is also higher than the amount disclosed by the consortium earlier this year. In an affidavit filed in January 2026, the outstanding amount, excluding legal and other expenses, was stated to be ₹8,135.63 crore. By August 31, that figure had risen to ₹8,751.86 crore.
The dispute therefore centres not simply on how much money has been recovered, but on how the remaining liability should be calculated.
Some attached shares linked to the case also remain intact and have not yet been sold, the lenders told the Bombay High Court. Their position is that the recovery process is not complete and that the assets already realised do not wipe out the remaining dues.
Mallya has been arguing for years that the recovery made by banks should bring the dispute to a close. His plea before the Bombay High Court dates back to 2020, when he sought the dismissal of criminal proceedings, arguing that lenders had recovered their dues.
The latest court filing adds another layer to that argument. The banks have opposed his plea to quash the money laundering case and have said his challenge to an earlier order dated December 31, 2019, should be rejected.
The financial recovery dispute is running alongside separate criminal proceedings involving the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). Those proceedings relate to allegations of bank fraud, criminal conspiracy and money laundering connected with loans extended to Kingfisher Airlines.
The ED has separately told the Bombay High Court that recovery of bank dues does not automatically bring money laundering proceedings to an end. The agency has said assets worth around ₹14,131.60 crore were restored to the SBI-led consortium, but argued that such restoration is a statutory mechanism for returning assets to legitimate claimants and does not decide whether alleged criminal offences were committed.
That distinction is central to the current proceedings. Civil recovery deals with money owed to lenders, while criminal proceedings examine alleged offences. The ED has maintained that one does not automatically extinguish the other.
Mallya, who left India in 2016, was declared a fugitive economic offender in 2019. He has continued to contest the proceedings and has argued that the recovery of assets exceeding the original debt should have consequences for the cases against him.
The latest affidavit from the lenders puts the focus firmly back on the outstanding financial liability. Their position is that despite substantial recoveries, the debt recovery process has not reached an end.
The Bombay High Court is scheduled to hear the matter next on October 13. The proceedings could provide further clarity on the competing claims over the amount recovered, the outstanding dues and the effect of those recoveries on Mallya’s pending criminal cases.
The lenders said recovery proceedings remain active, with unresolved dues and assets still under consideration by the Bombay High Court.