Shellz India Limited faces 10 vendor claims led by Rs 1.88 crore

Shellz India Limited has disclosed 10 pending vendor payment-recovery and micro, small and medium enterprise matters that could materially affect its operations or financial position if decided adversely. The largest stated demand is CVS Packaging Private Limited’s Rs 1.88 crore claim, including Rs 95.86 lakh of interest and a request for interim attachment or injunction over assets.

Why does Shellz face 10 vendor payment-recovery and MSME claims?

Shellz faces the 10 pending matters because suppliers and counterparties allege unpaid amounts for goods supplied between 2017 and 2025, while Shellz disputes liability in several cases. The company has grouped the proceedings under matters which, if decided adversely, could materially and adversely affect operations or financial position. The group comprises six commercial recovery suits, one commercial counterclaim and three proceedings involving the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006, or MSMED Act.

The claims cover industrial chemicals, food inputs, edible oil, fast-moving consumer goods, laminate and corrugated packaging. The disclosed amounts range from Annu Sales’ Rs 30.73 lakh recovery suit to CVS Packaging’s Rs 1.88 crore petition. These are asserted claims rather than adjudicated liabilities, and several stated figures include pre-suit interest, legal expenses, costs, or requests for pendente lite and future interest.

The Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council, or MSEFC, is the statutory forum used for certain payment disputes under Section 18 of the MSMED Act. Abhishek’s Delhi MSEFC claim seeks Rs 59.10 lakh, comprising Rs 45.11 lakh principal and Rs 13.99 lakh interest calculated at 18% a year through October 27, 2025. Basant Digital Solutions Private Limited separately alleges that Rs 43.17 lakh remained unpaid from supplies valued at Rs 1.96 crore between July 8, 2021 and August 8, 2023, and seeks Rs 43.10 lakh plus statutory interest and costs.

What does CVS Packaging’s Rs 1.88 crore claim seek from Shellz?

CVS Packaging seeks payment and interim protection over assets while its MSMED Act dispute remains unresolved. Its OMP(Comm.) No. 40 of 2026 petition was filed under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, read with Section 18 of the MSMED Act. Section 9 permits a court application for interim measures in connection with arbitration, while Section 18 provides the MSME payment-dispute process.

CVS Packaging alleges that it supplied corrugated boxes on credit up to August 28, 2025, leaving Rs 92.12 lakh outstanding. It claims Rs 95.86 lakh of interest under Section 16 of the MSMED Act, calculated through October 31, 2025, taking the stated total to Rs 1.88 crore. The petitioner has asked the Rohini Commercial Court for interim attachment or injunction over the assets of Shellz, Kapil Garg and Shalini Garg pending disposal of its claim.

The requested attachment or injunction distinguishes the CVS Packaging petition from the ordinary recovery suits because it seeks a protective court measure before the underlying dispute is finally decided. The disclosure does not state that an attachment or injunction has been granted. The next hearing was scheduled for November 18, 2026, and the interest component of Rs 95.86 lakh exceeded the alleged principal of Rs 92.12 lakh at the stated calculation date.

Which supplies and claimed amounts are involved in the other disputes?

The other disputes involve both packaging and production inputs, rather than a single supplier category. Meghdoot Packaging (Uttaranthal) alleges Rs 47.39 lakh is due for corrugated boxes and packaging materials supplied between 2021 and 2023. Kris Flexipacks Private Limited alleges Rs 25.34 lakh was outstanding as of July 3, 2020 for laminate and packing materials, and seeks Rs 36.10 lakh including pre-suit interest.

Food and manufacturing inputs are also central to multiple claims. Naav Enterprises alleges Rs 48.20 lakh remained unpaid as of March 31, 2023 for supplies including sugar and whey powder, and seeks Rs 52.90 lakh including pre-suit interest. Annu Sales alleges Rs 27.04 lakh was outstanding for industrial chemicals supplied from May 2022 to July 2024, and seeks Rs 30.73 lakh including interest and legal expenses.

Mohan Ram Trading Private Limited alleges that it supplied edible oil and fast-moving consumer goods worth Rs 3.34 crore and received Rs 2.58 crore in payments, leaving Rs 75.99 lakh outstanding. It seeks Rs 1.10 crore inclusive of pre-suit, pendente lite and future interest and costs. Solar Print Process Private Limited seeks Rs 38.57 lakh, including Rs 25.10 lakh principal and interest at 18% a year.

The former partners or legal heirs of dissolved partnership firm Baba Industries have filed a counterclaim in litigation initiated by Shellz. They claim recovery of Rs 1.20 crore, while Shellz says it raised debit notes of Rs 92 lakh plus applicable goods and services tax for agreed price adjustments. The disclosure describes the counterclaim’s stated principal and interest components inconsistently, so it does not provide a reconcilable breakdown of the total claim.

How is Shellz contesting the claims and what remains unresolved?

Shellz is contesting several claims through written statements, objections, assertions of defective supply and debit notes, but the disclosure records no final resolution in any of the 10 matters. In Abhishek’s MSEFC matter, Shellz has raised alleged defective material and part-payment as issues; the claimant says the last payment was received on March 25, 2025. The matter was at conciliation, the first stage of the Section 18 process, with a hearing set for October 12, 2026.

Shellz’s defences differ by supplier and purchase order. In Solar Print’s suit, Shellz says materials were not supplied in the required quantities and timelines. In the Meghdoot Packaging and Naav Enterprises suits, Shellz alleges supply failures concerning timing and quantities; in the Meghdoot case, Shellz also alleges an export loss of Rs 34.33 lakh and total damages of about Rs 53.83 lakh.

In the Kris Flexipacks case, Shellz says inferior and sub-standard laminate caused rejection of finished goods and losses of Rs 1.31 crore. In the Mohan Ram Trading dispute, Shellz denies the stated outstanding balance and alleges sub-standard materials caused Rs 88.46 lakh of losses and damages. These defences mean that the claimed amounts will persist as payment exposures only if the relevant courts or statutory forums reject Shellz’s positions or the parties do not settle their disputes.

Procedural dates disclosed for October through December 2026 show that near-term developments depend on hearings, mediation and MSEFC process rather than on any announced payment outcome. Naav Enterprises had a hearing set for October 8, 2026, Meghdoot Packaging for October 29, 2026, and Mohan Ram Trading for December 7, 2026. Solar Print’s matter was referred to mediation after a Delhi High Court proceeding, while Basant Digital’s next MSEFC date had not yet been received.

Conclusion

Shellz’s 10 disclosed vendor matters span ingredients, industrial chemicals, trading goods and packaging supplies, with claims proceeding through commercial courts and MSMED Act mechanisms. CVS Packaging’s Rs 1.88 crore petition is the largest stated demand, and its request for interim attachment or injunction introduces a potential asset-protection issue that is not identified in the other nine matters.

The next items to watch are the disclosed hearing schedule, particularly the November 18, 2026 CVS Packaging hearing and the progress of Solar Print’s mediation. Basant Digital’s matter also remains procedurally unresolved because the company had not received the next MSEFC hearing date, while the outcome of Shellz’s defences over supply quality, quantity and price adjustments remains undisclosed.