IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Appellate Side 31.07.2026 S/L 06 Court No. 4 (Naba) F.M.A. 1325 of 2022 With CAN 1 of 2023 CAN 2 of 2023 Bank of Baroda & Ors. Vs. Anshu Dinodiya @ Anshu Agrarwal (nee Saraf) Mr. Dipanjan Datta, Mr. Subhajit Chowdhury, Ms. Esha Basak ...for the Appellants Mr. Debasish Roy, Mr. Koushik Kundu ...for the Respondent 1. Affidavit-of-service filed on behalf of the appellants is taken on record. 2. Heard the learned advocate for the appellants and the learned advocate for the respondent. 3. We are informed by the learned advocate for the respondent that in between passing of the order by the Hon’ble Single Judge and today the writ petitioner/respondent has travelled abroad, only to return. He, therefore, submits that there is no tangible apprehension justifying the setting aside of the order passed by the learned Single Judge in the present Intra-Court Appeal. 2 4. The learned advocate for the Bank, however, submits that since the respondent/writ petitioner, and her husband have travel documents and some kind of residency status abroad, there is a serious apprehension in the mind of the Bank. 5. We find that the Hon’ble Single Judge while disposing of the writ petition has passed the following order: “Accordingly, WPA No. 18655 of 2022 is disposed of by quashing the LOC issued against the petitioner, which is impugned in the present writ petition. However, if the petitioner wishes to travel abroad, the petitioner will intimate the respondent-bank regarding the dates of travel and the place of her proposed residence when abroad, at least a fortnight prior to the date of her travel. Upon return to India as well, the petitioner shall intimate such fact to the respondent bank immediately. This order shall not prevent the bank from approaching a competent judicial forum for obtaining any award and/or order against the petitioner. There will be no order as to costs” 6. In view of the tenure of the order, we are of the view that based on an intangible apprehension of the Bank, and considering the conduct of the respondent/writ petitioner in the meantime, the order dated 22.08.2022 in WPA No.18655 of 2022 3 passed by the Hon’ble Single Judge does not require any interference in an Intra-Court Appeal. 7. The appeal is dismissed without interfering with and having regard to the order of the learned Single Judge extracted above. (Madhuresh Prasad, J.) (Prasenjit Biswas, J.)