Calcutta High Court
AP-COM/677/2026 of UNION BANK OF INDIA AND ANR. Vs BANK OF INDIA AND ANR. on 28 September 2026
SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA COMMERCIAL DIVISION ORIGINAL SIDE AP-COM/677/2026 UNION BANK OF INDIA AND ANR. VS BANK OF INDIA AND ANR BEFORE: The Hon’ble JUSTICE GAURANG KANTH Date : 28th September, 2026. Appearance:- Ms. Usha Doshi, Adv. …for petitioners. Mr. Debashis Saha,
Citations and Judicial Treatment
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…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
OCD- 11 ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA COMMERCIAL DIVISION ORIGINAL SIDE
AP-COM/677/2026 UNION BANK OF INDIA AND ANR. VS BANK OF INDIA AND ANR
BEFORE: The Hon’ble JUSTICE GAURANG KANTH Date : 28th September, 2026. Appearance:- Ms. Usha Doshi, Adv. …for petitioners. Mr. Debashis Saha, Adv. Mr. Avirup Roy Sanyal, Adv. Ms. Sucheta Pal, Adv. Mr. Jyotishman Sarkar, Adv. …for the respondents.
The Court: - The present petition has been filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 read with Section 11 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 seeking appointment of a sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes which have arisen between the parties in relation to competing claims over the secured assets described in the petition. The petitioners are the Union Bank of India. The respondents are the Bank of India and its authorized officer. It is the case of the petitioners that M/s. Maa Durga Traders represented by its proprietors, as guarantor had availed of a cash credit of Rs.24,00,000/- from erstwhile Corporation Bank, now merged with the petitioner Bank on 13thJune, 2017. The facility was secured, inter alia, by an equitable mortgage over the properties described in the petition. The account was subsequently restructured as a working capital loan of
Rs.25,36,841/- on 3rdSeptember, 2019. The account was classified as Non- Performing Asset (NPA) on 31stMarch, 2021. The proceedings under SARFAESI Act were thereafter initiated and possession of the secured asset was taken under Section 13(4) of the said Act on 7thNovember, 2022. The petitioner further proceeded to auction the said property by way of e- auction. It is stated that the borrower had died on 12th April, 2025. According to the petitioner, it was only in January 2026 that they came to know that the respondents Bank had by a notice dated 19th September, 2025 also asserted possession over the very same property under the SARFAESI Act. The petitioner contends that claim of the respondents conflicts with their prior mortgage and the security interest registered with CERSAI on 26th September, 2017, as also with the SARFAESI proceedings initiated by them. Learned counsel for the respondents states that they have no objection to the appointment of a sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties. With the consent of the parties, Mr. Altamas Alim, Advocate (Mobile No: 9163872786) is appointed as a sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties. The learned Sole Arbitrator shall enter upon the reference after making the disclosure with Section 12(1) of the Act and subject to the provisions of Section 12(5) thereof. The learned Sole Arbitrator shall fix his remuneration in terms of the Fourth Schedule of the Act or as may be agreed between the parties.
A copy of this order shall be communicated by the petitioner to the learned sole Arbitrator for necessary action. It is clarified that all questions relating to the arbitrability of the disputes, maintainability, the admissibility of the claims, limitation, jurisdiction, and all other issues are left open to be urged before the learned arbitrator, who shall decide the same in accordance with law. With the aforesaid directions, the present petition stands disposed of.
(GAURANG KANTH, J.)
R. D. Barua