PANJI GRIHA NIRMAN PVT. LTD. AND ORS ABHISMITA GOSWAMI vs AYAN SADHUKHAN AND ORS — CO /953/2026

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section NA. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED on 01st April 2026.

CNR: WBCHCA0124602026

CASE DISPOSED

Next Hearing

19th March 2026

Filing Number

CO /958/2026

Filing Date

16-03-2026

Registration No

CO /953/2026

Registration Date

16-03-2026

Judge

HON'BLE JUSTICE OM NARAYAN RAI

Coram

HON'BLE JUSTICE OM NARAYAN RAI

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

GROUP B (CIVIL MATTERS) ( 2 )

Sub-Category

Miscellaneous ( 57 )

Judicial Branch

RULE SECTION

Decision Date

01st April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED

Acts & Sections

CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Section NA

Petitioner(s)

PANJI GRIHA NIRMAN PVT. LTD. AND ORS ABHISMITA GOSWAMI

Respondent(s)

AYAN SADHUKHAN AND ORS

Hearing History

Judge: HON'BLE JUSTICE OM NARAYAN RAI

19-03-2026

NEW MOTION

31-03-2026

NEW MOTION

30-03-2026

NEW MOTION

25-03-2026

NEW MOTION

Orders

01-04-2026
HON'BLE JUSTICE OM NARAYAN RAI

Summary The Calcutta High Court held that the trial court erred in passing a status quo order ex parte on February 21, 2026, without notifying the petitioners despite their valid caveat (No. 1897 of 2025) filed on December 24, 2025. Following the precedent in *Sukumar Roy v. Pratul Kumar Roy*, the court mandated that the trial court must immediately hear the petitioners' recall application and, if satisfied that grounds exist, rehear the injunction application with the defendants present within ten days. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Calcutta High Court held that the trial court erred in passing a status quo order ex parte on February 21, 2026, without notifying the petitioners despite their valid caveat (No. 1897 of 2025) filed on December 24, 2025. Following the precedent in *Sukumar Roy v. Pratul Kumar Roy*, the court mandated that the trial court must immediately hear the petitioners' recall application and, if satisfied that grounds exist, rehear the injunction application with the defendants present within ten days. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

Explore other courts

Search Another Case