RABINDRANATH SARKAR TAPAN ROY vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. — MAT/383/2026

Case under Sarfaesi Act ,2002 Section N A. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSED on 19th May 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 05-Mar-2026

CNR: WBCHCA0096832026

Filing Number

MAT/391/2026

Filing Date

25-Feb-2026

Registration No

MAT/383/2026

Registration Date

26-Feb-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Justice Rajasekhar Mantha , Hon'ble Justice Rai Chattopadhyay

Coram

Hon'ble Justice Rajasekhar Mantha , Hon'ble Justice Rai Chattopadhyay

Bench Type

Division Bench

Category

GROUP A (WRIT MATTERS) ( 1 )

Sub-Category

Residuary ( 26 )

Judicial Branch

STAMP REPORTER (SR) SECTION

Decision Date

19-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSED

Last updated 29-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Sarfaesi Act ,2002 Section N A

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.RABINDRANATH SARKAR TAPAN ROY

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 19-May-2026

    Hon'ble Justice Rajasekhar Mantha,hon'ble Justice Rai ChattopadhyayView PDF

    The appeal filed by Rabindranath Sarkar against the State of West Bengal was dismissed as not pressed on May 19, 2026, after the appellant's counsel informed the court that his client did not wish to proceed further. The connected application (CAN 1 of 2026) was also dismissed, and any interim orders were vacated with no order regarding costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 19-May-2026

    Assigned Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Rajasekhar Mantha , Hon'ble Justice Rai Chattopadhyay

  4. 06-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Justice Shampa Sarkar,hon'ble Justice Ajay Kumar GuptaView PDF

  5. 05-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 25-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. MAT/383/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The appeal filed by Rabindranath Sarkar against the State of West Bengal was dismissed as not pressed on May 19, 2026, after the appellant's counsel informed the court that his client did not wish to proceed further. The connected application (CAN 1 of 2026) was also dismissed, and any interim orders were vacated with no order regarding costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case