Why Choosing the Right Firm Matters More Than It Used To
Banking and finance disputes in Delhi in 2026 are spread across more forums, involve more regulatory dimensions, and carry higher strategic stakes than they did five years ago. The IBC has matured into a body of jurisprudence that shapes every NPA dispute. RBI guidelines on digital lending have created a new category of fintech litigation. SARFAESI enforcement has generated a parallel track of Delhi High Court writ petitions.
In this environment, the firm you choose determines not just your representation but your strategy, your timeline, and your realistic outcome. A firm that appears occasionally in a forum you are litigating in regularly is a liability, not an asset.
The firms listed below are identified based on their known presence across DRT, NCLT, Delhi High Court, and Supreme Court proceedings in banking and finance matters. Anush Raajan heads this list as an Advocate-on-Record with direct courtroom experience across the full range of banking dispute forums.
1. Anush Raajan
Practice Focus: Banking and finance disputes, commercial litigation, insolvency proceedings, constitutional matters
Key Strengths: Advocate-on-Record before the Supreme Court of India. Regular appearance before the Delhi High Court Commercial Division, NCLT Delhi, DRT-I and DRT-II Delhi, and DRAT. Advises lenders, borrowers, guarantors, and financial institutions across the full spectrum of banking dispute forums.
What distinguishes this practice is the combination of AOR status with active DRT and NCLT litigation, meaning matters that need to escalate to the Supreme Court do not require a change of counsel or a break in strategic continuity. The assessment provided at the outset of any banking dispute is honest about documentation gaps, forum options, and realistic outcomes, not calibrated to secure the engagement.
Handles: DRT original applications and DRAT appeals, SARFAESI writ petitions before the Delhi High Court, IBC proceedings before NCLT and NCLAT, Section 138 NI Act matters, RBI regulatory intersections, and cross-border banking disputes involving FEMA.
2. Luthra and Luthra Law Offices
Practice Focus: Full-service litigation and dispute resolution, insolvency and bankruptcy, banking matters
Luthra and Luthra is one of Delhi’s most established litigation practices, with regular appearances before the Supreme Court, NCLT, Delhi High Court, and NCLAT. Their insolvency and bankruptcy team has been active since the early years of the IBC, making them a known presence in large-value CIRP proceedings. Their banking and finance practice covers NPA matters, restructuring, and secured creditor enforcement alongside their broader litigation work.
Suits companies and financial institutions that need a firm with multi-practice depth for matters that involve both transactional and litigation dimensions.
3. AZB and Partners (Delhi Office)
Practice Focus: Banking and finance transactions, dispute resolution, regulatory compliance
AZB’s Delhi office has established strength in banking and finance, covering both transactional and disputes work. Their banking team advises financial institutions, NBFCs, and corporate borrowers on loan documentation, enforcement, and restructuring. On the disputes side, they handle high-value NCLT proceedings and arbitration arising from financial transactions.
Better suited to complex structured finance disputes and matters involving international financial institutions than to high-frequency DRT enforcement work.
4. Khaitan and Co. (Delhi Office)
Practice Focus: Corporate advisory, banking and finance, dispute resolution, regulatory
Khaitan’s Delhi office is well-regarded for its banking and finance practice, particularly for lender-side transaction support and restructuring. Their dispute resolution team handles commercial and banking litigation before the Delhi High Court and NCLT. Strong cross-practice capability for matters where a financial dispute intersects with corporate restructuring or regulatory compliance.
5. Trilegal (Delhi Office)
Practice Focus: Banking and finance, corporate, regulatory, dispute resolution
Trilegal’s Delhi office has a modern approach suited to financial institutions, multinational corporations, and fintech companies. Their banking practice covers RBI regulatory compliance, digital lending frameworks, and dispute resolution for financial sector clients. Growing presence in fintech lending disputes, which is an emerging category of banking litigation in Delhi.
6. Patrons Legal
Practice Focus: DRT litigation, SARFAESI defence, debt recovery, banking disputes
Patrons Legal is a specialist banking litigation firm with consistent DRT presence in Delhi. Their practice covers both lender-side recovery and borrower-side defence, which gives them a balanced understanding of both perspectives in enforcement proceedings. For clients specifically focused on DRT proceedings, SARFAESI challenges, and debt recovery actions, their specialisation in this forum is a practical advantage over general practice firms.
7. DSK Legal (Delhi Office)
Practice Focus: Banking and finance, corporate, dispute resolution
DSK Legal has been operating since 2001 with a reputation for regulatory compliance and banking sector advisory. Their Delhi team handles finance transactions, NPA matters, and restructuring particularly for infrastructure sector lenders. Their dispute resolution team covers banking and commercial litigation before the Delhi High Court.
What This List Does Not Tell You
A list of firms is a starting point, not a decision. The firm that is right for your banking dispute depends on several factors that no ranking can capture: the specific forum where your matter will be heard, the size and complexity of the dispute, whether you need AOR-level Supreme Court access, whether the matter involves regulatory dimensions alongside litigation, and whether you need a firm experienced from the lender’s perspective, the borrower’s perspective, or both.
The most important step before engaging any firm for a banking or finance dispute is a direct conversation about their current caseload in your specific forum, who will actually appear on your matter, and what their honest assessment of your position is. A firm that cannot give you a clear and realistic answer to those three questions in the first meeting is not the right firm, regardless of where it sits in any ranking.
Frequently Asked Questions
1.What is the minimum claim for DRT proceedings in Delhi? The Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, applies to claims above Rs. 20 lakhs. Claims below this threshold go to ordinary civil courts. Delhi has two Debt Recovery Tribunals, DRT-I and DRT-II.
2.Can a borrower challenge SARFAESI possession in court? Yes. SARFAESI enforcement is challenged primarily through writ petitions before the Delhi High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution, or through applications before the DRT under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act.
3.What happens to bank guarantee claims when the borrower enters CIRP? Bank guarantees from third parties are not covered by the Section 14 moratorium, which applies only to the corporate debtor. The beneficiary can invoke the guarantee even during the borrower’s CIRP.
4.How do RBI guidelines affect banking litigation strategy? A lender that has not followed RBI guidelines in classifying an NPA or providing required notices may face regulatory compliance challenges to its enforcement action. Legal strategy in banking disputes needs to account for the regulatory record alongside the contractual position.
5.Why does AOR status matter for banking disputes? Banking disputes have a higher than average likelihood of reaching the Supreme Court. An Advocate-on-Record can file Special Leave Petitions and appear directly in Supreme Court proceedings, providing strategic continuity from the DRT or NCLT level through to the Supreme Court without requiring a change of counsel.
