SUDIP PAITYA vs PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK AND 3 ORS. Advocate - SC, PNB — I.A.(Civil)/1810/2026
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section ORDER XXXIX, RULE 1, RULE 2, SEC. 151.
CNR: GAHC010103632026
e-Filing Number
22-05-2026
Filing Number
I.A.(Civil)/5912/2026
Filing Date
22-05-2026
Registration No
I.A.(Civil)/1810/2026
Registration Date
30-05-2026
Judge
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN
Coram
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
10301 - Interlocutory Application (Civil) ( 382 )
Judicial Branch
Civil Section
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
SUDIP PAITYA
Adv. MR. D MOZUMDER,MR. D MAZUMDAR,MR. D MAZUMDAR, ,MR. S BISWAS,MR C GOGOI,MR. D MAZUMDAR
Respondent(s)
PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK AND 3 ORS. Advocate - SC, PNB
THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER, PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK, FANCY BAZAR, BRANCH (
ASST. GENERAL MANAGER, PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK, FANCY BAZAR BRANCH (
THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER CUM CIRCLE HEAD, PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK, CIRCLE OFFICE
Orders
Case Summary: I.A.(Civil)/1810/2026 Sudip Paitya v. Punjab National Bank & Ors. Sudip Paitya sought temporary injunction to restrain Punjab National Bank from disturbing his possession of a 3 kathas 18 gondas plot of land (2nd RS Patta No. 27, Dag No. 113), which he claimed was never mortgaged to the bank. The trial court had dismissed his earlier injunction application, citing pending proceedings before the Debts Recovery Tribunal. Justice Robin Phukan found a strong prima facie case in Paitya's favor, noting the bank arbitrarily affixed possession notices on unmortgaged property. The court granted temporary injunction, directing parties to maintain status quo until 10.06.2026. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: I.A.(Civil)/1810/2026 Sudip Paitya v. Punjab National Bank & Ors. Sudip Paitya sought temporary injunction to restrain Punjab National Bank from disturbing his possession of a 3 kathas 18 gondas plot of land (2nd RS Patta No. 27, Dag No. 113), which he claimed was never mortgaged to the bank. The trial court had dismissed his earlier injunction application, citing pending proceedings before the Debts Recovery Tribunal. Justice Robin Phukan found a strong prima facie case in Paitya's favor, noting the bank arbitrarily affixed possession notices on unmortgaged property. The court granted temporary injunction, directing parties to maintain status quo until 10.06.2026. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts