The Court:
1. The appeal arises out of an interim order dated November 22, 2025
passed by the learned arbitrator. The learned arbitrator, upon
considering the rival contentions of the parties and upon taking into
account the admitted position of extension of loan/credit facility by the
respondent to the appellant and default in repayment thereof, by an
interim order imposed a second charge on the personal property of the
petitioner being premises no.4A/1, Tangra, Second Lane, Kolkata – 700
046, P.S.- Entally, Ward No.58, Kolkata Municipal Corporation.
2. Mr. Dey, learned advocate for the petitioner submits that the IDFC
First Bank Limited had a first charge on the property and the said
bank should have been impleaded in the proceeding, before any order
attaching the property could be passed. The learned Arbitrator
considered such prayer but rejected the same with reasons. It was held
that the bank was neither a necessary nor a proper party. The bank
was not a signatory to the agreement between the parties, and the
learned Arbitrator did not have jurisdiction to decide any issue between
the appellants and the bank. The loan agreement was executed
between the respondents and the claimant. The adjudication before
the learned tribunal was restricted to the disputes arising out of the
loan agreement and as such, adding the bank would be beyond the
scope of the reference.