Bombay High Court restrains ex-Clippings CEO from alienating assets over ₹222 crore fraud

KanoonHQ Legal Gazette · AI-generated brief from the source linked below. How briefs are made

Published 29 October 2026

Case: Clippings India Pvt Ltd v. Vinayak Shrivastav
Court: Bombay High Court
Source: Bar & Bench

Bottom Line Up Front (BLUF)

In Clippings India Pvt Ltd v. Vinayak Shrivastav, the Bombay High Court restrained the former CEO, Vinayak Shrivastav, from alienating his assets up to ₹222 crore. The court found a prima facie case of fraud and misappropriation of funds, granting an interim injunction to protect the company's interests.

Ratio Decidendi · Legal Principle Established

The court may grant an interim injunction restraining a defendant from alienating assets if there is a prima facie case of fraud or misappropriation of funds, and a likelihood that the defendant may dispose of assets to frustrate a decree.

Practice & Procedural Impact for Advocates

Advocates seeking asset freezing orders must establish a strong prima facie case of fraud or asset dissipation. Litigants facing such orders should be prepared to demonstrate legitimate sources of funds and the absence of intent to alienate assets.

Key Legal Takeaways

1The Bombay High Court granted an interim injunction against the former CEO of Clippings India Pvt Ltd.
2The injunction restrains the former CEO from alienating assets up to ₹222 crore.
3The court found a prima facie case of fraud and misappropriation of funds.

The Legal Issue Clippings India Pvt Ltd approached the Bombay High Court alleging that its former CEO, Vinayak Shrivastav, had committed fraud and misappropriated funds amounting to ₹222 crore. The company sought an interim injunction to restrain Shrivastav from alienating his assets, fearing that he might dispose of them to frustrate any future decree.

Court's Reasoning The Bombay High Court considered the submissions made by Clippings India Pvt Ltd and found that there was a prima facie case of fraud and misappropriation of funds against Vinayak Shrivastav. The court noted the substantial amount involved and the potential for the company to suffer irreparable harm if Shrivastav were allowed to alienate his assets. To protect the company's interests and ensure that any eventual decree could be satisfied, the court deemed it necessary to grant an interim injunction.

What Follows The Bombay High Court issued an interim injunction restraining Vinayak Shrivastav from alienating, encumbering, or creating any third-party rights over his assets up to the value of ₹222 crore. This order will remain in effect pending further orders of the court in the ongoing proceedings. Shrivastav is now prohibited from dealing with his assets in a manner that would prejudice Clippings India Pvt Ltd's ability to recover the alleged misappropriated funds.