Calcutta High Court

CPAN/1757/2025 of ADYA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED Vs SWAPAN KUMAR RANA, MANAGER, PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK on 10 July 2026

Cites 0, Cited by 0

2026 (AK) 16-17 C.P.A.N 1757 of 2025 in WPA 21968 of 2019 IA No: CAN 1 of 2021 CAN 2 of 2024 CAN 3 of 2024 With WPA 1674 of 2020 IA No: CAN 3 of 2023 Adya Projects Private Limited Vs. Swapan Kumar Rana Mr. Diilip Kumar Samanta Mr. Biswapriya Samanta Mr. Sabyasachi Howlader Ms. Tiyasa Singha

10th July,

(AK)

16-17

C.P.A.N 1757 of 2025

in

WPA 21968 of 2019

IA No: CAN 1 of 2021

CAN 2 of 2024

CAN 3 of 2024

With

WPA 1674 of 2020

IA No: CAN 3 of 2023

Adya Projects Private Limited

Vs.

Swapan Kumar Rana

Mr. Diilip Kumar Samanta

Mr. Biswapriya Samanta

Mr. Sabyasachi Howlader

Ms. Tiyasa Singha Roy

...for the petitioner.

Ms. Parna Roy Choudhury

...for the alleged contemnor.

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

Cited by

0

Decisions in the index citing it

Cites

0

Decisions referred to

In this index

0

Of the decisions it cites

Overruled / Questioned

0

No negative treatment found

Loading the citing and cited decisions…

1. Affidavit-of-service filed in court today be kept on record.

2. In the present contempt application, the petitioner alleges that the order of this court dated December 5, 2019 passed in W.P. 21968(W) of 2019, whereby interim relief was granted in terms of prayer (e) of the writ petition, restraining the respondents, their men agents, servants, employees and/or subordinates from giving in effect or further effect to the impugned notice of intended sale of the security interest issued by respondent no.8, has been violated.

3. From the averments in the contempt application, it transpires that certain officers of the respondent-

Bank have been communicating to the petitioner, insisting on payment of the loan money.

4. However, per se, such act on the part of the officials of the Bank, even if any, do not amount to acting in terms of the said sale notice, the operation which was stayed by the order under contempt.

5. Also, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner made efforts for a one time settlement in the meantime, thus indicating that the petitioner has also approached the bank officials in the meantime.

6. Hence, we do not find any contumacious action on the part of the Bank or that the sale notice, which was stayed by the order under contempt, has been given effect to in any manner.

7. Thus, no contempt lies and the contempt application is not maintainable.

8. Accordingly, CPAN 1757 of 2025 is dismissed on contest without any order as to costs.

9. Urgent certified copies of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties upon compliance of all requisite formalities.

(Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J.)

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead