Calcutta High Court
As Chokhani Securities Ltd.) vs M/S Proqutech Engineering And Ors on 10 December, 2024
Author: Shampa Sarkar
Bench: Shampa Sarkar
OCD-21
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction
ORIGINAL SIDE
(Commercial Division)
AP-COM/971/2024
M/S UGRO CAPITAL LIMITED(FORMERLY KNOWN
AS CHOKHANI SECURITIES LTD.)
VS
M/S PROQUTECH ENGINEERING AND ORS
BEFORE:
The Hon'ble JUSTICE SHAMPA SARKAR
Date : 10th December, 2024
Appearance:
Mr. Paritosh Sinha, Adv.
Mr. K. K. Pandey, Adv.
Mr. Gyan Prakash, Adv.
...For the Petitioner
The Court:- Despite service, none appears on behalf of the respondents.
The petitioner is the finance company which entered into a facility
agreement with the respondents. The petitioner had extended some loan of
(working capital) on the basis of the facility agreement in favour of the
respondent. The facility agreement contains an arbitration clause. The facility
agreement mentions the venue of arbitration to be Kolkata. The value of the
money claim, i.e., the subject matter of reference, is in excess of Rs.10 lakhs.
The respondents failed to repay loan. According to the petitioner, part of the
cause of action arose within the jurisdiction of this Court.
The loan recall notice has been elaborately placed before this Court and it
appears that a total outstanding of Rs.1,29,59,653/- together with applicable
2
interest, charges, costs etc. are payable by the respondents. The respondents are
at Ahemdabad and the petitioner apprehends that the respondents would
withdraw whatever money they have without paying a single penny to the
petitioner. It is further contended that the properties should be attached and a
Receiver be appointed so that the claim may be secured. The apprehension of the
petitioner cannot be held to be baseless at this stage.
The facility agreement had been entered into by and between the parties
and loan had been advanced to the respondents. At the present moment, the
Court is not inclined to attach the properties or appoint a Receiver over the
same. However, the Court directs that the respective banks shall debit freeze the
accounts of the respondents which have been mentioned in paragraph 25 of the
application upto February 28, 2024.
The bank details are quoted below:
Bank Name Account No. IFSC Code
Bank OI 210310110007605 BKIDO002103
ICICI 231205500211 ICIC0002312
IOB 230401000001172 IOBA0002304
CANARA BANK 3251136000020 CNRB000020
HDFC BANK 50200055526198 HDFC0001677
HDFC BANK 50100444488569 HDFC0001677
BIO BANK 204610110003760 ACCOUNT CLOSED
BIO BANK 210310110003495 NA
3
The banks shall act on the server copy of this order.
The respondents are at liberty to pray for modification, vacation or
variation of this order.
Affidavit-in-opposition be filed within two weeks from date. Reply thereto,
if any, be filed two weeks thereafter.
Let this matter appear on 10th February, 2025. Further notice be issued
upon the respondents, along with a copy of this order.
This order is being passed on the undertaking given by the petitioner that
they shall proceed in accordance with the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
(SHAMPA SARKAR, J.)
S.Bag