ICICI BANK LTD Vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Defendants are served. Defendants Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 are represented.

(2.) The limited ad-interim relief that Mr Jagtiani for the Plaintif seeks is in terms of prayer clause (c) at page 11, which reads thus:

(3.) The Plaintif, ICICI Bank, brought suit to safeguard its interest as a secured creditor of the 5th Defendant under a Rupee Facility Agreement dated 13th June 2012 read with the registered Deed of Hypothecation dated 16th December 2015. The Plaintif first filed a Notice of Motion No. 2453 of 20181 and then another Notice of Motion No. 1377 of 2019. In these Motions, the Plaintif sought an injunction against Defendants Nos. 1 and 2, viz., State Bank of India and Dena Bank, from exercising what is called their 'right of substitution' of the 3rd Defendant as the concessionaire of a highway toll road project with another entity (called a "Putative Selectee") under a Substitution Agreement to the alleged exclusion and prejudice of the Plaintif's rights as a secured creditor of the 3rd Defendant under the two documents referred to above.