WeWork India IPO: Bombay High Court Reserves Order; Co Says Listing On Track For Oct. 10

The Bombay High Court on Oct. 8 reserved its order in the WeWork IPO matter, after hearing detailed arguments from both sides on disclosure lapses and regulatory oversight surrounding the company’s Rs 3,000-crore initial public offering.

While the spokesperson for the petitioners said that the verdict may impact the initial public offering, the company clarified that the stock market debut, scheduled on Oct. 10, is on track.

The High Court of Bombay has reserved orders in writ petitions filed by two complainants, namely Hemanth Kulshrestha and Vinay Bansal. The Court has heard the matter extensively over three days and has reserved orders. Notably, no urgent interim orders as sought in the petitions were granted, according to sources.

The complainants had alleged inadequate disclosures by WeWork India, insufficient oversight by SEBI, and sought additional disclosures and a stay on the WeWork IPO.

In the case of one of the complainants, Vinay Bansal, it was pointed out to the court that the petitioner had failed to disclose complete facts to the court.

This was particularly in the context of having received responses to its complaints made to SEBI regarding the IPO.

Senior Counsel Navroz Seervai, who represented Vinay Bansal, made a formal statement before the court that the actions of the Petitioner were reprehensible. The court took note of the same.

SEBI, represented by senior counsel Shiraz Rustomjee, submitted that the complaints were without locus and that SEBI had taken all appropriate and necessary actions in the WeWork IPO process. SEBI also pointed out that the allegation of inadequate disclosures was incorrect and all necessary disclosures and risks to investors could be found in the public documents.

During the hearing, the petitioners argued that there can be no exception to full and proper disclosure of serious criminal proceedings pending against promoters and key managerial personnel. They alleged that merchant bankers made selective disclosures, without any independent oversight or materiality determination by SEBI, thereby compromising investor protection and market transparency.

The arguments also questioned SEBI’s role as a market watchdog, suggesting the regulator had been reduced to a “postman” between the issuer and investors, simply forwarding filings rather than conducting meaningful scrutiny or diligence.

The WeWork India IPO, structured entirely as an offer-for-sale, witnessed a weak retail investor response, with qualified institutional buyers stepping in to ensure overall subscription. The lacklustre retail participation and pending High Court verdict have now cast uncertainty over listing-day pricing and sentiment.