NOMURA INVESTMENT AND FINANCE PRIVATE LIMITED GARGI GOSWAMI vs OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR — APO /1/2026

Case under Companies Act ,1956 Section NA. Next hearing: : -.

CNR: WBCHCO0042672025

Next Hearing

: -

Filing Number

APOT /310/2025

Filing Date

24-11-2025

Registration No

APO /1/2026

Registration Date

24-11-2025

Judge

HON'BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA , HON'BLE JUSTICE SUPRATIM BHATTACHARYA

Coram

HON'BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA , HON'BLE JUSTICE SUPRATIM BHATTACHARYA

Bench Type

Single Bench

Judicial Branch

APPEAL SECTION

Acts & Sections

Companies Act ,1956 Section NA

Petitioner(s)

NOMURA INVESTMENT AND FINANCE PRIVATE LIMITED GARGI GOSWAMI

Respondent(s)

OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR

Hearing History

Judge: HON'BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA , HON'BLE JUSTICE SUPRATIM BHATTACHARYA

25-11-2025

NEW APPLICATIONS

24-03-2026

NEW APPLICATIONS

27-02-2026

APPEAL FROM ORDER(COMPANY)

09-02-2026

APPEAL FROM ORDER(COMPANY)

02-02-2026

APPEAL FROM ORDER(COMPANY)

Orders

25-03-2026
HON'BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA,HON'BLE JUSTICE SUPRATIM BHATTACHARYA

Court Order Summary The High Court at Calcutta refused the interim prayer for stay of a Single Judge's November 2025 judgment that had reversed a 1979 winding-up order of a company. The Court held that the Company Court retained jurisdiction to examine alleged fraudulent misappropriation of company assets by Special Officers appointed in 1991, despite the IBC's applicability, and found no change in circumstances warranting a stay order that was previously denied by the regular bench. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Court Order Summary The High Court at Calcutta refused the interim prayer for stay of a Single Judge's November 2025 judgment that had reversed a 1979 winding-up order of a company. The Court held that the Company Court retained jurisdiction to examine alleged fraudulent misappropriation of company assets by Special Officers appointed in 1991, despite the IBC's applicability, and found no change in circumstances warranting a stay order that was previously denied by the regular bench. 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