Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. and Ors. Vs Prasanta Soren — Calcutta HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. and Ors. Vs Prasanta Soren — Calcutta HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

MAT 769 of 2025 and CAN 1 of 2025 disposed of without interfering with the impugned ad interim injunction and without entering into the merits; learned Single Judge requested to take up the writ petition for hearing on its next scheduled date, September 8, 2025; all points left open; no order as to costs.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Division Bench should interfere with the learned Single Judge's ad interim order of injunction restraining seven tank trucks, given the appellants' contention that third party rights were created in the subject tank trucks prior to the passing of the order.

Court's answer

The Bench did not intend to take up the appeal on merits, since the writ petition was itself fixed for hearing before the learned Single Judge on September 8, 2025, affidavits had been exchanged, and any observation made in appeal might prejudice the hearing of the writ petition.

Ratio / Principle

Since the dispute raised in the appeal could only be thrashed out upon affidavits being exchanged, the matter was relegated to be heard before the learned Single Judge.

Key takeaways

All points were kept open to be decided by the learned Single Judge at the final hearing of the writ petition.ratio¶¶19

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court at Calcutta (M.A.T 769 of 2025, IA No. CAN 1 of 2025) — Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited and others v. Prasanta Soren (Judgment on 21.08.2025; Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya and Uday Kumar, JJ.; judgment by Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J.). Appeal against an ad interim order of injunction of the learned Single Judge restraining seven tank trucks, wherein the appellants contended that third party rights had been created in the subject tank trucks prior to the passing of the order. Since the writ petition was already fixed for hearing on September 8, 2025 with affidavits exchanged and ready for hearing, the Division Bench declined to decide the appeal on merits, observing that any observation in appeal might prejudice the hearing of the writ petition. MAT 769 of 2025 and CAN 1 of 2025 were disposed of without interfering with the impugned order and without entering into the merits, the matter being relegated to the learned Single Judge with a request to take up the writ petition on September 8, 2025; all points kept open; no order as to costs.

In the High Court at Calcutta Civil Appellate Jurisdiction Appellate Side

The Hon’ble Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya And The Hon’ble Justice Uday Kumar

M.A.T 769 of 2025

IA No: CAN 1 of 2025

Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited and others

Vs.

Prasanta Soren

For the appellants	:	Mr. Biswanath Chatterjee Mr. sobhan Pathak
For the respondent	:	Mr. Saptansu Basu, Snr. Adv. Mr. Ramesh Dhara
Heard on	:	21.08.2025
Judgment on	:	21.08.2025

Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J.:-

1. The present appeal has been preferred against an ad interim order of injunction granted by the learned Single Judge.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants submits that despite the appellants having created third party rights in respect of the subject tank trucks prior to the passing of the order, the learned Single Judge passed a restraint order in respect of seven tank trucks.

2

3. Learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent opposes such contention and argues that the said objection was not taken before the learned Single Judge.

4. To this, learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants, precisely for pointing out such fact, sought for directions of affidavit.

5. Be that as it may, since we are apprised that the writ petition is itself fixed for hearing before the learned Single Judge on September 8, 2025 and affidavits have already been exchanged in respect of the same and the writ petition is otherwise ready for hearing, we do not intend to take up the appeal on merits, as any observation made by this Bench in appeal might prejudice the hearing of the writ petition itself.

6. In any event, since the dispute as raised in the present appeal can only be thrashed out upon affidavits being exchanged, we relegate the matter to be heard before the learned Single Judge.

7. Accordingly, MAT 769 of 2025, along with the connection application, bearing CAN 1 of 2025, are disposed of without interfering with the impugned order as well as without entering into the merits of the rival contentions of the parties, requesting the learned Single Judge to take up the writ petition itself for hearing on the next scheduled date, that is, on September 8, 2025.

3

8. Needless to say, all points are kept open to be decided by the learned Single Judge at the final hearing of the writ petition.

9. There will be no order as to costs.

10. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance of all formalities.

(Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J.)

I agree.

(Uday Kumar, J.)