Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Calcutta High Court

Srei Equipment Finance Limited vs Benita Granites Limited And Anr on 23 June, 2025

Author: Shampa Sarkar

Bench: Shampa Sarkar

OCD 34
                  IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                       COMMERCIAL DIVISION
                           ORIGINAL SIDE

                      AP-COM/267/2025
               SREI EQUIPMENT FINANCE LIMITED
                            VS
              BENITA GRANITES LIMITED AND ANR.


BEFORE:
The Hon'ble JUSTICE SHAMPA SARKAR
 Date : 23rd JUNE, 2025

                                                              Appearance:
                                             Mr. Swatarup Banerjee, Adv.
                                                  Mr. Avishek Guha, Adv.
                                              Mr. Sk. Sariful Haque, Adv.
                                             Mr. Ankush Majumdar, Adv.
                                              Mr. Adipta Kr. Pandit, Adv.
                                                           ...for petitioner
                                      Mr. Sirsanya Bandopadhyay, Adv.
                                                    Mr. Soham Roy, Adv.
                                            Mr. Rahul Kumar Singh, Adv.
                                        Ms. Anusmita Bhattacharya, Adv.
                                                        ...for respondents

Ms. Tanima Sengupta, Adv./Receiver.

1. Let this matter appear on 14th July, 2025 at 1.00 PM when the learned Advocate for the respondents will come back with a receipt showing that the amount as originally directed by this Court in the order dated 5th February, 2025 amounting to Rs.5 lakhs has been paid to the petitioner.

2. If the amount is not paid, the location of the secured asset shall be disclosed.

3. The report of the learned Receiver is taken on record. It appears that the location of the secured asset has not been disclosed by the respondents to the Receiver. Hence, the Receiver could not take possession of the secured asset. 2

4. The Receiver shall circulate the report amongst the learned Advocates for the respective parties.

5. Learned Advocate for the respondents submits that the respondents are willing to settle the dispute by paying reduced amount.

6. The petitioner does not agree.

7. The order of injunction over the assets shall be continued.

(SHAMPA SARKAR, J.) pa/GH