Disposed¶19

The Royal Bank of Scotland N.V. v. Surajit Sen

Calcutta HC17 Jun 2026CS/26/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Royal Bank of Scotland N.V. v. Surajit Sen; CS/26/2005; High Court at Calcutta, Original Side; Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay; suit disposed of as withdrawn; Terms of Settlement; mutual release and discharge; decree dated 27th February 2002; deed of guarantee; withdrawal of SLP before Supreme Court of India; withdrawal of pending proceedings; 48 hours notice default clause.

What did the court decide?

Suit CS 26 of 2005 disposed of as withdrawn on the basis of the Terms of Settlement signed between the parties and their advocates. ¶19

The Royal Bank of Scotland N.V. Vs Surajit Sen — Calcutta HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

OD-4

¶2

ORDER SHEET

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE

¶4

CS/26/2005

¶5

THE ROYAL BANK OF SCOTLAND N.V. VS SURAJIT SEN

¶6

BEFORE:

¶7

THE HON’BLE JUSTICE ANANYA BANDYOPADHYAY Date: 17^th June, 2026

¶8

Appearance: Mr. Paritosh Sinha, Adv. Ms. Shrayashee Das, Adv. Mr. Tridibesh Dasgupta, Adv. Ms. Anukriti Agarwal, Adv. …For the Plaintiff

¶9

Mr. A. Dutt, Adv. Mr. A. P. Agarwalla, Adv. …For the Defendant

¶10

The Court:- The Learned Advocate representing the plaintiff as well as the defendant have filed Terms of Settlement which, inter alia, states as follows:

¶11

“b) The Plaintiff agrees to file an application for withdrawal of the suit before the Hon'ble High Court at Calcutta being CS 26 of 2005 on the basis of the present terms of settlement simultaneously with the Defendant's abovementioned application for withdrawal of SLP before the Supreme Court of India.

¶12

c) Both the parties to the agreement confirms and agrees and hereby irrevocably releases/discharges each other and agrees that there will be no claims against each other pursuant to the Decree dated 27th February 2002 or the transaction referred to in the said decree and/or in respect of any legal charges incurred for any legal proceedings undertaken in respect of the deed of guarantee referred to in the said Decree.

¶13

¶14

d) Upon signing of the instant terms of settlement it is confirmed and agreed by the parties that it is the full and final settlement of disputes between the parties.

¶15

e) On signing and execution of these instant terms of settlement by fulfilling all the above-mentioned clauses, both the parties will declare, confirm and agree that no claims in future will be raised against each other regarding this instant Terms of Settlement and Decree dated 27th February 2002 or the transactions referred to therein.

¶16

f) On signing and execution of this instant Terms of Settlement, both the parties will withdraw all the pending proceedings stated above filed against each other.

¶17

g) Defendant and the Plaintiff shall sign and execute all such papers and documents and shall do all such acts and/or deeds as may be required from time to time in furtherance of withdrawal of all proceedings.

¶18

h) If there is default of any of the above-mentioned clauses this Terms of Settlement the non-defaulting party shall give 48 hours notice to the defaulting party to rectify the default failing which the settlement shall stand infructuous.”

¶19

The instant suit being CS 26 of 2005 is disposed of as withdrawn on the basis of the Terms of Settlement signed between the parties and the Advocates.

¶20

(ANANYA BANDYOPADHYAY, J.)

¶21

The Royal Bank of Scotland N.V. v. Surajit Sen

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Royal Bank of Scotland N.V. v. Surajit Sen

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sandhya Nayek & Ors. Vs Nicl & Anr.

I. G. E. (India) Private Limited Vs Larica Infrastructure Limited

I G E (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs Larica Infrastructure Ltd.

Nur Kanchan Mallick Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Johiruddin Biswas @ Jinnat Ali Biswas & Ors. Vs Managing Director, Calcutta State Trans. Corp.

Golden Peninsula Impex Vs National Bank Ltd. and Ors.