Calcutta High Court

FMAT/205/2026 of GROUP GENERAL MANAGER OF INDIAN RAILWAYS CATERING AND TOURISM CORPORATION LTD. AND ANR. Vs SUNSHINE CATERERS PVT. LTD. on 7 July 2026

Cites 0, Cited by 0

No.16 07.07.2026 TN FMAT 205 of 2026 IA No: CAN 1 of 2026 CAN 2 of 2026 CAN 3 of 2026 Group General Manager of Indian Railways Catering and Tourism Corporation Ltd. and another Vs. Sunshine Caterers Pvt. Ltd. Mr. Arijit Bardhan, Mr. Sarosij Dasgupta, Mr. Sabyasachi Dey, Mr. Gourab Mondal, Ms.

AD-30

Ct No.16

07.07.2026

TN

FMAT 205 of 2026

IA No: CAN 1 of 2026

CAN 2 of 2026

CAN 3 of 2026

Group General Manager of Indian Railways Catering and Tourism Corporation Ltd. and another

Vs.

Sunshine Caterers Pvt. Ltd.

Mr. Arijit Bardhan,

Mr. Sarosij Dasgupta,

Mr. Sabyasachi Dey,

Mr. Gourab Mondal,

Ms. Afreen Begum,

Ms. C. Chatterjee,

Ms. A. Roy

....for the appellants

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. Learned counsel for the appellants hands over a copy of an order dated July 02, 2026, passed in connection with an application under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, an ad interim order passed in which has been assailed in the present appeal.

2. From the said order and as per the submission of learned counsel for the appellant, it transpires that the petitioner/respondent in the Section 9 application (Miscellaneous Case No. 1555 of 2026), subsequent to the passing of the impugned order, sought to withdraw such application but was not permitted to do so in view of the serious allegations raised therein.

3. Although learned counsel for the appellants seeks to submit before the Court that the petitioner/respondent was guilty of suppression of material facts, since we are not taking up the matter

on merits, we choose not to go into such allegations at this stage.

4. Be that as it may, in view of the appeal having been rendered infructuous due to non-extension of the limited ad interim order which has been assailed herein, FMAT

of is dismissed as infructuous.

5. We further reiterate that the merits of the matter have not been gone into at all.

6. CAN 1 of 2026, CAN 2 of 2026 and CAN 3 of 2026 are also disposed of in the light of the above observations.

7. There will be no order as to costs.

(Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J.)

(Supratim Bhattacharya, 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