Wse Polyzap Private Limited vs Vatsal Packaging Private Limited
2026 Latest Caselaw 525 Cal/2

Calcutta High Court

Wse Polyzap Private Limited vs Vatsal Packaging Private Limited on 4 February, 2026

OCD-16
                              ORDER SHEET

                    IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                             ORIGINAL SIDE
                          (Commercial Division)

                            AP-COM/476/2025

                    WSE POLYZAP PRIVATE LIMITED
                                VS
                  VATSAL PACKAGING PRIVATE LIMITED


  BEFORE:
  The Hon'ble JUSTICE GAURANG KANTH
  Date : 4th February, 2026.

                                                                    Appearance:
                                               Mr. Shatadru Chakraborty, Sr. Adv.
                                                           Mr. Debraj Sahu, Adv.
                                                     Mr. Rabindra Kr. Mitra, Adv.
                                                         Ms. Antara Biswas, Adv.
                                                        Mr. Tamoghna Saha, Adv.
                                                              ...for the petitioner

                                                     Mr. Jagannath Ganguly, Adv.
                                                             ...for the respondent

The Court: This Court vide order dated 28th January, 2026 had

adjourned the matter to enable the WBMSME Facilitation Council to decide

the application under Section 17 of the Act.

Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that the hearing

before the WBMSME Facilitation Council was conducted on 30 th January,

2026, however, no order has been passed till date.

Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner has drawn the

attention of this Court to the conduct of the learned counsel for the

respondent. It is submitted that, during the proceedings before the

WBMSME Facilitation Council held on 10.12.2025, learned counsel for the

respondent had stated that the petitioner had already filed an application

under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 before this

Court, and on that basis sought deferment of the hearing of the application

under Section 17 of the Act pending disposal of the said Section 9

application. However, when the petitioner's application under Section 9 was

taken up for consideration by this Court on 14.01.2026, learned counsel for

the respondent, Mr. Ganguly, took a contrary stand and submitted that the

present application under Section 9 was not maintainable, inasmuch as the

petitioner had already preferred an application under Section 17 of the Act

before the WBMSME Facilitation Council. It was further submitted on behalf

of the respondent on that date that the Council had already heard the

matter and had reserved the same for orders.

The conduct of the respondent is deprecated, as he is misleading both

the Council as well as this Court by making incorrect submissions before

both forums.

Learned Counsel for the respondent, at this stage, seeks and is

granted three weeks to file an affidavit-in-opposition. Reply thereto, if any,

shall be filed within one week thereafter.

List the matter on 17th March, 2026.

In the meantime, it is clarified that the pendency of the present

application under Section 9 of the Act shall not operate as a stay of the

proceedings before the WBMSME Facilitation Council and that the Council

shall be at liberty to decide the pending application under Section 17 of the

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, in accordance with law.

(GAURANG KANTH, J.)

R.Bhar