Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
M/S. Atlantic Projects Ltd. & Others vs The Allahabad Bank & Others on 3 January, 2019
Author: Tapabrata Chakraborty
Bench: Tapabrata Chakraborty
1
03.01.19
Item No.19
Court No.15
rpan
W.P. No. 25538 (W) of 2018
M/s. Atlantic Projects Ltd. & Others
- Versus -
The Allahabad Bank & Others
Mr. Saktinath Mukherjee,
Mr. Satyaraj Banerjee,
Mr. Syed Nurul Arefin
... for the petitioners.
Mr. Om Narayan Rai,
Ms. Soumashree Ghosh
... for the respondents.
Affidavit of service filed by the petitioners be kept on record. The present writ petition has been preferred challenging inter alia a notice dated 1st October, 2018, issued on behalf of the respondent no.4.
Mr. Mukherjee, learned senior advocate appearing for the petitioners submits that a show-cause notice for declaring the petitioner no.1 as wilful defaulter was issued on 24th July, 2018 placing reliance upon a forensic audit report. The petitioners could not reply to the same, as no copy of the said forensic audit report was supplied in spite of several representations submitted to that effect. Subsequently, by the impugned notice, the authorities have handed over a copy of only a portion/part of the forensic audit report and have also denied the petitioners' prayer towards engagement of a lawyer.
According to Mr. Mukherjee, the petitioners cannot be denied to be represented before the respondent no.4 through a lawyer and such denial is arbitrary and illegal. In support of such contention reliance has been placed upon a judgment delivered in W. P. 22439 (W) of 2012. A copy of the same has been handed over to Mr. Rai, learned advocate appearing for the respondents.
2
Mr. Rai, learned advocate appearing for the respondents has handed over a copy of the entire forensic audit report to Mr. Mukherjee in Court today. He also informs this Court that though the hearing before the respondent no.4 was scheduled on 29th December, 2018, the same has been deferred.
As the copy of the forensic audit report has already been handed over to Mr. Mukherjee, the petitioners would be at liberty to file a reply to the show-cause notice within two weeks from date.
The only issue which remains to be considered is as to whether the petitioners are entitled to be represented by a lawyer at the time of hearing before the respondent no.4.
List this matter for further consideration under the same heading in the daily supplementary list of this Court on 24th January, 2019.
(Tapabrata Chakraborty, J.)