Ltd vs Arun Properties Llp And Ors
2026 Latest Caselaw 1635 Cal/2

Calcutta High Court

Ltd vs Arun Properties Llp And Ors on 9 March, 2026

Author: Debangsu Basak

Bench: Debangsu Basak

O-28
                                  APOT/311/2025
                                 IA No.GA/1/2025

                         IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                             Civil Appellate Jurisdiction
                                    Original Side


                                         SQUARE FOUR ASSET MANAGEMENT
                                         AND RECONSTRUCTION CO. PVT.
                                         LTD.
                                                  -VERSUS-
                                         ARUN PROPERTIES LLP AND ORS.

BEFORE :
THE HON'BLE JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK
            And
THE HON'BLE JUSTICE MD. SHABBAR RASHIDI
Date : 9th March, 2026.
                                                                          Appearance:
                                                                  Mr. Rohit Das, Adv.
                                                          Mr. Kaushik Banerjee, Adv.
                                                               Ms. Sudipta Seal, Adv.
                                                           Ms. Sarbani Ghosal, Adv.
                                                                  ...for the appellant.

                                                              Mr. Utpal Bose, Sr. Adv.
                                                          Mr. Dhruba Ghosh, Sr. Adv.
                                                          Mr. Souvik Majumdar, Adv.
                                                     Ms. Ananyapurba Banerjee, Adv.
                                                                 ...for the respondent.

Mr. Rachit Lakhmani, Adv.

Mr. Swapan Nath, Adv.

...for the respondent no.6.

The Court :- Appeal is at the behest of two of the defendants in a suit

for administration and management of a building.

Impugned order is ad interim in nature. Injunction application is yet

to be finally decided.

By the impugned order, the learned Single Judge permitted the

plaintiffs to replace the defective transformer on the terms and conditions laid

down therein.

Since the order appealed against is ad interim in nature and since

the application is yet to be finally decided, we are not minded to interfere at

this stage.

We clarify that in the event the plaintiffs act in terms of the impugned

order and in the event the learned single charge is pleased to grant relief which

requires installation of the transformer at a different place, then the cost of

installation of the transformer in terms of the order impugned, will be borne

entirely by the plaintiffs.

APOT/311/2025 along with the connected application is disposed of

without any order as to costs.

All points raised by the parties are kept open.

(DEBANGSU BASAK, J.)

(MD. SHABBAR RASHIDI, J.)

A/s.