Dismissed

Atibir Industries Co. Ltd. v. State Bank of India

Calcutta HC12 Jun 2023APO/50/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Division Bench observed that the appeal and a parallel writ application involve conflicting jurisdictions. It held that the writ application should be heard and disposed of by the single judge first to avoid conflict, maintaining the existing status quo only till 15th July, 2023, after which the single judge may extend it.

What did the court decide?

The appeal (APO 50/2023) and connected IA No. GA 1/2023 are disposed of. All points kept open before the single judge handling the writ application.

Atibir Industries Co. Ltd. Vs State Bank of… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Calcutta HC (2023)

¶1

OD-2

¶2

ORDER SHEET

¶3

APO/50/2023 With WPO/722/2023 IA No. GA/1/2023

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE

¶5

ATIBIR INDUSTRIES CO. LTD. VERSUS STATE BANK OF INDIA

¶6

BEFORE:

¶7

The Hon'ble JUSTICE I. P. MUKERJI And

¶8

The Hon'ble JUSTICE BISWAROOP CHOWDHURY

¶9

Date : 12^th June, 2023.

¶10

Appearance: Mr. Ranjan Bachawat, Sr. Adv. Mr. Suman Kr. Dutt, Adv. Mr.Arijit Bardhan, Adv. Mr. Soumyajit Mishra, Adv. …for the appellant/petitioner Mr. Joy Saha, Sr. Adv. Mr. Santosh Kumar Ray, Adv. Ms. Sonal Agarwal, Adv. …for the respondent bank Mr. Ratnanko Banerji, Sr. Adv. Mr. Siddhartha Datta, Adv. Mr. Deepanjan Dutta Roy, Adv. Ms. Sanjana Jha, Adv. Mr. Chetan Kabra, Adv. …for CFM Asset Reconstruction Pvt Ltd.

¶11

The Court: On 28^th April, 2023, we admitted this appeal.

¶12

We also passed an interim order that till 19^th May, 2023 or until further orders whichever was earlier, the assignee of the respondent would not create any further assignment or third party interest in respect of the subject matter.

¶13

On 19^th May, 2023, when the appeal and the stay application came up for further consideration, we extended our interim order made on 28^th April, 2023 till

¶14

¶15

16^th June, 2023, directing the appeal to come up for further consideration after the summer vacation on 12^th June, 2023.

¶16

It has so appeared today.

¶17

We observe that, in the meantime, on 8^th June, 2023 the writ application (WPO/722/2023) together with the application made by the assignee, Asset Reconstruction Company, CFM to be added as party, came up for consideration before a learned single judge of this Court. On the same day his lordship made an order adding the applicant as a party, directing affidavits to be exchanged in the writ application and posting it for hearing on 21^st June, 2023.

¶18

One observation in the said order is of some importance. It is as follows :

¶19

“In the meantime, it is expected that the respondent Bank shall not proceed with the matter pending before the NCLT between the parties till 30^th June, 2023, or until further orders, whichever is earlier.”

¶20

This appeal is against the refusal of the learned single judge to pass an interim order.

¶21

Since filing of the appeal and today some time has elapsed and in this time period the writ application has become ready for hearing after filing of affidavits.

¶22

The interim order made by us on 28^th April, 2023 has also been continuing.

¶23

The above expectation of the learned single judge expressed on 8^th June, 2023 is also being respected by the State Bank of India.

¶24

In our opinion, this appeal is a parallel proceeding to the one pending after filing of affidavits before the learned Single Judge. It might have a tendency to cause conflict of jurisdictions and orders.

¶25

It would be in the best interest of justice if on the existing status quo the writ application is heard out and disposed of by the learned single judge as early as possible. The existing status quo should be maintained only up to 15^th July, 2023 after which it may only be extended by the learned single judge on very sufficient grounds only.

¶26

¶27

We order accordingly.

¶28

All points are kept open before the learned single judge.

¶29

The appeal (APO 50 of 2023) and the connected application (IA No. GA 1 of

¶30

are disposed of.

¶31

(I. P. MUKERJI, J.)

¶32

(BISWAROOP CHOWDHURY, J.)

¶33

sp3

Atibir Industries Co. Ltd. v. State Bank of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Atibir Industries Co. Ltd. v. State Bank of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pan Seeds Pvt. Ltd. Vs Ramnagar Seeds Farm Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.

Sk Rahim Vs Basiruddin Khan and Anr.

sujata chakraborty and Anr. Vs Maya Chakraborty and Anr.

Probir Roy Vs Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata - Xvii

Sk Mosiar Ali Vs the Additional District Magistrate and Anr.

Sumon Roy Vs State of West Bengal & Ors.