Jaydep Chakraborty and Anr. Vs Repose Clinic and Research Centre Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. — Calcutta HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Jaydep Chakraborty and Anr. Vs Repose Clinic and Research Centre Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. — Calcutta HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Appeal FMA 476 of 2025 and CAN 1 of 2025 disposed of on the respondents' assurance that no new transfer of the disputed shares will be registered till disposal of the temporary injunction application in the trial court; defendants/respondents to file written objections within three weeks; Trial Judge requested to expedite and preferably dispose of the injunction application within three weeks of such filing; no order as to costs (para 14).

Issue for consideration

Whether, pending disposal of the temporary injunction application before the trial court, registration of new transfers of the disputed shares should be restrained, and how the appeal should accordingly be disposed of.

Court's answer

FMA 476 of 2025 along with CAN 1 of 2025 stands disposed of on the basis of the respondents' assurance that no new transfer regarding the disputed shares shall be registered till disposal of the temporary injunction application in the court of first instance.

Ratio / Principle

The defendants/respondents are to file their written objection(s) to the injunction application in the trial court within three weeks from date.

Key takeaways

The learned Trial Judge is requested to expedite the hearing of the temporary injunction application, preferably disposing of the same within three weeks from the date of filing of the written objection(s) by the defendants/respondents.ratio¶12
The Bench clarifies that it has not entered into the merits of the matter; it is open to the learned Trial Judge to decide the injunction application independently and on its own merits without being influenced by any observations made in connection with the appeal or in the order impugned.ratio¶13

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

In an appeal (FMA 476 of 2025 with CAN 1 of 2025) by Jaydeep Chakraborty and Anr. against Repose Clinic & Research Centre Private Limited and Ors. concerning disputed shares, Senior Counsel for respondent nos.1 to 3, on instructions, submitted that no new transfer of the disputed shares would be registered till disposal of the temporary injunction application in the court below, without any admission or concession on merits. On that assurance, the two-Judge Bench (Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya and Uday Kumar, JJ.; decision dated 10.04.2025) disposed of the appeal and application instead of keeping them pending. Defendants/respondents were directed to file written objection(s) to the injunction application in the trial court within three weeks, and the learned Trial Judge was requested to expedite the hearing, preferably disposing of the injunction application within three weeks of such filing. The Court clarified it had not entered into the merits and left the Trial Judge free to decide independently, uninfluenced by observations in the appeal or the impugned order. There was no order as to costs.

AD- 17 Ct No.16 10.04.2025 (SSS)

FMA 476 of 2025 With CAN 1 of 2025

Jaydeep Chakraborty and Anr. Vs. Repose Clinic & Research Centre Private Limited and Ors.

Mr. A. Mookherji, Mr. Prithish Chandra

…For the Appellants.

Mr. S. N. Mitra, Sr. Adv. Mr. P. P. Roy, Mr. Avra Mazumder, Ms. Alisha Das, Mr. Suman Bhowmik, Mr. Samrat Das, Ms. Elina Dey, Mr. Sourendra Nath Banerjee

…..For the Respondent nos.1 to 3.

Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondents, on instruction from his clients, submits that no new transfer shall be registered with regard to the disputed shares till disposal of the temporary injunction application in the court below. However, it is also submitted that such concession does not tantamount to any admission and/or concession on the merits of the case.

In view of such fair stand having been taken by the respondents, instead of unnecessarily keeping the appeal and application pending, we dispose of

2

FMA 476 of 2025 along with CAN 1 of 2025 on the basis of the assurance given by the respondents to the effect that no new transfer regarding the disputed shares shall be registered till disposal of the temporary injunction application in the court of first instance.

The defendants/respondents shall file their written objection(s) to the injunction application in the trial court within three weeks from date. The learned Trial Judge is requested to expedite the hearing of the temporary injunction application, preferably disposing of the same within three weeks from the date of filing of the written objection(s) by the defendants/respondents.

We clarify further that we have not entered into the merits of the matter and it would be open to the learned Trial Judge to decide the injunction application independently and on its own merits without being influenced by any of the observations made in connection with the present appeal or in the order impugned herein.

There will be no order as to costs.

(Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J.)

(Uday Kumar, J.)