Srg Earth Resources Private Limited vs Basu'S Industrial Oil And
2026 Latest Caselaw 151 Cal/2

Calcutta High Court

Srg Earth Resources Private Limited vs Basu'S Industrial Oil And on 19 January, 2026

Author: Arindam Mukherjee

Bench: Arindam Mukherjee

OC-2 & 6
                                                           ORDER SHEET



                 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                  [COMMERCIAL DIVISION MATTER]

                     IA NO. GA-COM/5/2024
                      [OLD NO.CS/26/2022]
                        CS-COM/345/2024
             SRG EARTH RESOURCES PRIVATE LIMITED
                               Vs
                   BASU'S INDUSTRIAL OIL AND
                       CHEMICAL AND ORS.

                        IA NO. GA/4/2023
                      [OLD NO.CS/26/2022]
                        CS-COM/345/2024
             SRG EARTH RESOURCES PRIVATE LIMITED
                                Vs
                   BASU'S INDUSTRIAL OIL AND
                       CHEMICAL AND ORS.


  BEFORE:
  The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARINDAM MUKHERJEE

Date: 19th January, 2026

Mr. Shubasish Sengupta, Adv.

Mr. Lalit Baid, Adv.

Mr. Satyaki Mukherjee, Adv.

Mr. Tamoghna Saha, Adv.

. . . for applicant/plaintiff in GA/4/2023 (CS/26/2022)

Mr. Rupak Ghosh, Adv.

Ms. Gargi Goswami, Adv.

Mr. Amitava Deb, Adv.

Mr. Krishnendu Halder, Adv.

. . . for applicants/defendants in GA-COM/5/2024 (CS/26/2022) The Court :- GA-COM 5 of 2024 is an application by the defendants

for revocation of the leave granted under the provisions of Section 12A of the

Commercial Courts Act, 2015 to the plaintiff to institute the suit without

going for pre-suit mediation inter alia on the ground that no ground is

pleaded in the plaint to show that the plaintiff contemplate an urgent order.

The plaintiff has also filed an application for judgment upon

admission being GA 4 of 2023.

It is the submission of the plaintiff that at one point of time the

defendants had agreed to pay the reduced amount of the principal sum by

way of installments. The defendants did not pursue such offer though the

plaintiff was agreeable to go ahead with such proposal. The defendants,

however, dispute this fact.

On behalf of the defendants it is submitted that the plaintiff did not

show any willingness to deliberate the issue for the purpose of agreeing to a

figure.

The claim in the suit arises out of unpaid consideration money for

goods sold and delivered.

Without going into the assertion and denial by the parties, I think

that two commercial houses should be governed by commercial motive and

make a further attempt to reconcile the accounts for the purpose of

ascertaining as to what sum has been paid and what amount is due from

each side. In order to complete this exercise and place a correct picture

before the Court no only in respect of these two applications but also for the other suits between the parties and the connected applications filed therein.

Let these two applications along with GA-COM 4 of 2024, GA-COM 5 of

2024, GA 1 of 2022, GA-COM 6 of 2025, GA 1 of 2022, GA-COM 6 of 2025,

GA 1 of 2023 and GA-COM 2 of 2024 appear on 18 th February, 2026.

(ARINDAM MUKHERJEE, J.)

pa