Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 2652 Cal/2
Judgement Date : 17 September, 2025
OD-7
APOT/231/2025
IA NO: ACO/1/2025
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Civil Appellate Jurisdiction
ORIGINAL SIDE
RE FIBRE PROCESSORS PVT LTD (IN LIQN)
VS
OM PRAKASH BHARTIA
-VS-
OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR, HIGH COURT, CALCUTTA AND ANR.
BEFORE:
The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARIJIT BANERJEE
The Hon'ble JUSTICE OM NARAYAN RAI
Date : 17th September, 2025.
Appearance:
Mr. Ranjan Bachawat, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Sourojit Dasgupta, Adv.
Mr. Giridhar Dhelia, Adv.
Ms. Subhasree Hazra, Adv.
Mr. Yogesh Sharma, Adv.
...for the appellant
Mr. Jishnu Saha, Sr. Adv.
Mr. U. S. Menon, Adv.
Mr. Zeeshan Haque, Adv.
Mr. Abhirup Chakraborty, Adv.
...for the respondent no.2
Mr. Deepak Kr. Singh, Adv.
Ms. Saptamita Pramanick, Adv.
...for the Official Liquidator
2
Dictated by Arijit Banerjee, J.
The Court : This appeal is directed against a judgment and order dated
July 18, 2025 passed by a Learned Judge of this Court in CA/10/2024 filed
in connection with CP/155/1985.
The facts of the case which immediately relevant are that the Learned
Company Judge, on a disclaimer application made by the respondent no.2
herein, directed the Official Liquidator, who is in charge of the company (in
liquidation), to hand back physical possession of the property in question to
the respondent no.2 which claims to be the owner of the property. It
appears that before the company went into liquidation, there was an
agreement between the company and the respondent no.2 for sale of the
concerned property by the company to the respondent no.2. However, the
final conveyance was never executed. We need not go into those facts
immediately. We propose to hear out the appeal.
Let the appellant file requisite number of informal paper-books
containing all papers that were available before the Learned Single Judge by
October 27, 2025. All formalities are dispensed with. Since the respondents
are represented, notice of appeal is deemed to be waived.
We are told that possession of the concerned property has been made
over to the respondent no.2.
Mr. Saha, Learned Senior Counsel representing the respondent no.2, in
his usual fairness, says that the respondent no.2 shall not deal with the
property in question till the end of November, 2025 or until further order,
whichever is earlier.
The stay application is disposed of.
However, for the sake of convenience, a copy of the stay petition be
included in the paper-books.
Let the appeal be listed on November 3, 2025 under the appropriate
heading within the first five items.
Since no affidavits have been called for, the allegations made in the
petition are deemed not to be admitted by the respondents.
(ARIJIT BANERJEE, J.)
(OM NARAYAN RAI, J.)
kc.
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!