K.P. Credit And Traders Private ... vs Anurag Rungta
2023 Latest Caselaw 3014 Cal/2

ORDER SHEET
                                                                                OCD-15

                      IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                    ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
                           [COMMERCIAL DIVISION]


                               IA No. GA/1/2023
                                       In
                                 CS/167/2023
                  K.P. CREDIT AND TRADERS PRIVATE LIMITED
                                    VERSUS
                               ANURAG RUNGTA



  BEFORE:
  The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARINDAM MUKHERJEE

Date: 17th October, 2023.

Appearance:

Mr. Suresh Sahani, Adv.

Ms. Anjana Banerjee, Adv.

For the plaintiff.

Mr. Rupak Ghosh, Adv.

Ms. Sananda Ganguli, Adv.

For the defendant.

The Court:- In a suit for recovery of money said to have been lent

and advanced, the plaintiff has filed this application, inter alia, for injunction.

The plaintiff says that in February, 2015 on being approached by the

defendant the plaintiff had lent out money repayable with interest at the rate of

12% which was re-negotiated to 9% from 1st April, 2015 and further re-negotiated

to 7% per annum from 1st April, 2020. The plaintiff further says that disbursal of

the loan and receipt of the money are admitted facts. The defendant had paid

interest and has also repaid a portion of the principal sum lent and advanced.

The plaintiff thereafter had filed a suit being CS/30/2022. In the said suit on

17th May, 2022 an application for injunction being IA No. GA 1 of 2022 an order

of injunction in terms of prayer (g) of the notice of motion was passed by a co-

ordinate Bench. The said order was then carried on in appeal. A Division Bench

of this Court by a judgment and order dated 30th March, 2023 had dismissed the

suit on the ground that the suit did not contemplate any urgent interim relief. As

a consequence thereof the plaint was rejected which resulted in dismissal of the

interlocutory application wherein the order dated 17th May, 2022 was passed.

The plaintiff thereafter had complied with the requirement of pre-institution

mediation and has filed this suit. In the application no case has been made out

except the general pleading that the defendant is attempting to dispose of his

properties in order to frustrate the plaintiff's claim and to defeat and/or obstruct

and/or delay the execution of the decree. No particulars of the properties which

the defendant is attempting to alienate or dispose of has been provided. No bank

account detail is also provided in the application. The plaintiff on the contrary

has sought for appropriate orders and/or directions for calling upon the

defendant to make full and complete disclosure in respect of his assets.

In prayer (a) the plaintiff has simply asked for an order of injunction

against the defendant, his men, servants, agents, employees and assigns from

dealing with or disposing of or encumbering and/or alienating any of the

properties of the defendant or from operating the bank account without first

keeping a sum of Rs. 54,89,125/-. In prayer (b) the plaintiff has alternatively

prayed for a direction upon the defendant to furnish security for a sum of Rs.

54,89,125/-. In prayer [c] the plaintiff has sought for a direction upon the

defendant to show cause. In prayer (d) the plaintiff has sought for a direction

upon the defendant to file an affidavit of assets relating to his fixed and/or other

assets, properties and bank accounts and receivables. In prayer (e) the plaintiff

has asked for ad-interim orders in terms of prayers (a), (b), (c) and (d).

Learned Advocate appearing for the plaintiff submits that this Court

should be pleased to pass an ad interim order of injunction because a co-

ordinate Bench on 17th May, 2022 had passed an order of injunction.

Unfortunately, the learned advocate has not taken into account the passage of

time between 17th May, 2022 and this date which is more than one and half

years. There is no particular as discussed above about the properties or the bank

account. The foundation for an order of injunction has also been laid in this

application by supporting documents. The order dated 17th May, 2022 had

stood discharged in view of the order of the Division Bench dated 30th March,

2023. In absence of any material or fresh material being produced to satisfy the

conditions as enumerated under Order XXXIX Rule 1(b) of the Code of Civil

Procedure, 1908, no injunction or ad-interim order of injunction can be passed at

this stage. The lack of material particular do not persuade me to pass any order

of injunction at this stage in form of an ad interim order. Even going by the ratio

laid down in the judgment reported in [2021] 6 SCC 418 (Rahul S. Shah-

Versus-Jinendra Kumar Gandhi), I do not find the instant case to be one

wherein the defendant should be directed to secure the plaintiff's claim or be

directed to file affidavit of assets. The matter requires further scrutiny which can

effectively take place upon the defendant giving an opportunity to disclose their

stand on affidavits.

Affidavit-in-opposition be filed by 17th November, 2023. Affidavit in

Reply thereto, if any, be filed by 30th November, 2023.

Let this matter appear in the monthly list of December, 2023.

(ARINDAM MUKHERJEE, J.)

snn