OC 73 ORDER SHEET AP-COM/925/2024 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION COMMERCIAL DIVISION M/S UGRO CAPITAL LIMITED ( FORMERLY KNOWN AS CHOKHANI SECURITIES LTD.) VS MEENAKSHI EDUCATION OF TRUST AND ORS. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SHAMPA SARKAR Date: 10th April, 2025. Appearance: Mr. Paritosh Sinha, Adv. Mr. K.K. Pandey, Adv. Ms. Pooja Sett, Adv. Ms. Mallika Bothra, Adv. …for the petitioner The Court: 1. The affidavit of service is taken on record. 2. Despite service, none appears for the respondents. It appears that by an order dated January 6, 2025, the Court had recorded the assurance given by a learned advocate who appeared on behalf of the respondents and had undertaken to file vakalatnama, that, the immovable properties would not be encumbered, alienated and third party rights would not be created. The matter was taken up on February 10, 2025 when none appeared on behalf of the respondents. This Court directed further 2 service and also injuncted the respondents from disposing of and/or alienating the immovable properties described in Paragraph 35 of the application. The details of the properties were quoted in the said order. This order was also served upon the respondents but, none appears. 3. This is a case of non-payment of the loan amount extended by the finance company. It appears that the loan agreement contains an arbitration clause. The loan was rescheduled when the borrowers failed to pay the instalments. After the rescheduling, a supplemental agreement was entered into on June 21, 2021. Again, there were failures to comply with the repayment schedule. A loan recall notice was issued on September 23, 2024 and the respondents were asked to pay Rs.6, 63,97,007/- together with applicable interest. It is submitted that more than Rs.6 crores are due and payable. The jurisdiction of Courts of Kolkata is available from the said agreement. 4. Considering the above facts and the conduct of the respondent no.1 who has chosen to not appear before the Court, despite service of notice on various occasions, and an undertaking given by a learned Advocate, this court deems it necessary to protect the claim of the petitioner as a strong, prima facie, case of non-payment of loan has been made out. The respondents would have appeared and contested the proceedings in the event it was their case that, they were either not liable to pay the amount claimed or that they had adhered to the repayment schedule. 5. Accordingly, the Court continues the interim order for a further period of three months, thereby, restraining the respondents from dealing with, 3 disposing of, encumbering, alienating, creating third party interest and changing the nature and character of the immovable property. The petitioner will take steps for appointment of an Arbitrator. The details of the property is quoted below: “Details of Properties All that Piece and parcel of Land and Building, bearing Plot No. R-54, Comprised in S. Nos. 278 Part & 279 Part, as per TSLR New T.S. No. 66, Block No. 42, Ward No. 1, measuring with an extent of 7 grounds (16800 Sq. Ft) Situated at T.V.S. Colony, Anna Nagar, West Extension Scheme, Padi Village, Ambattur Taluk, Thiruvallur District and bounded on the : North by : Plot Nos. 979, 978, 977 & 976 South by : 20 Feet Road East by : T. 266, Plot Nos. 251 & T. 210 West by : T. 267, 20Feet Road, T.250 & T. 211” 6. After expiry of the aforementioned period, the respondent may pray for interim order before the Arbitrator. 7. Accordingly, AP-COM/925/2024 is disposed of. (SHAMPA SARKAR, J.) B.Pal