Pulinat Ettan Thomas vs Finorchem Limited
2026 Latest Caselaw 2843 Cal/2

Calcutta High Court

Pulinat Ettan Thomas vs Finorchem Limited on 9 April, 2026

Author: Debangsu Basak

Bench: Debangsu Basak

OCD-8
                                ORDER SHEET

                       IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                           Civil Appellate Jurisdiction
                             COMMERCIAL DIVISION

                             APDT/ 9/2026
                 IA No. GA-COM/1/2026, GA-COM/2/2026

                           PULINAT ETTAN THOMAS
                                    -Vs-
                            FINORCHEM LIMITED

BEFORE:
The Hon'ble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK
             -AND-
The Hon'ble JUSTICE MD. SHABBAR RASHIDI

Date: April 9, 2026.

                                                                       Appearance:
                                                         Aniruddha Mitra, Sr. Adv.
                                                         Mr. Sayan Banerjee, Adv.
                                                               ...for the appellant

                                                              Mr. Aritra Basu, Adv.
                                                    Mr. Patita Paban Bishwal, Adv.
                                                          Ms. Swastikaa Roy, Adv.
                                                               ...for the respondent

1. IA No. GA-COM/1/2026 is an application for condonation of delay.

2. Learned advocate appearing for the respondent submits that there is

hardly any explanation for the condonation of delay. He refers to the

averments made in the application for condonation of delay.

3. There is a delay of about 129 days in making and filing the appeal.

4. Appeal is directed against a decree passed in a suit for recovery of

services rendered.

5. Explanation sought to be offered is that, time was consumed for

transmission of cause papers and obtaining legal opinion and that, the

delay was purely unintentional.

6. There is some substance in the contention of the respondent that, the

explanation offered is specious.

7. However, on the principle that the fault of an advocate should not visit

the litigant, we deem it appropriate to condone the delay in making and

filing the appeal.

8. IA No. GA-COM/1/2026 is allowed.

9. IA No. GA-COM/2/2026 is an application for stay of the impugned

judgment and decree.

10. Learned Senior Advocate appearing for the appellant submits that, the

appellant is not in a position to secure the decretal amount.

11. There is no extenuating circumstance warranting this Court to stay

execution of the decree without security. At least nothing is brought to

the attention of this Court.

12. In such circumstances, question of grant of stay of execution of the

decree or decree itself without security does not and cannot arise.

13. The defendant is at liberty to execute the decree notwithstanding

pendency of the present appeal.

14. Appellant will prepare requisite number of informal paper books

incorporating all papers used before the learned Trial Judge within a

period of 4 weeks from date.

15. List the appeal in the monthly list of June, 2026.

16. IA No. GA-COM/2/2026 is disposed of.

(DEBANGSU BASAK, J.)

(MD. SHABBAR RASHIDI, J.)

sp3