D/L- 30 08/09/2026 Ct. No.- 6 Aritra C.O. 2993 of 2026 M/s. Bulesky Property Ventures LLP Vs. Santosh Kumar Pandey & Ors. Mr. Shounak Muknopadhyay Ms. Ranita Jana ….for the petitioner Mr. Anirban Ray, Sr. Adv., Mr. Orijit Chatterjee Mr. Soumabho Ghosh Ms. Safura Ahmed Mr. Nimish Mishra Mr. Ayan Banerjee Mr. Debjit Mukherjee Mr. R.K. Pandey ….for the opposite party nos.1 to 3 Mr. Souritra Ganguly ….for the opposite party no.4 Mr. Sayak Ranjan Ganguly Ms. Srijani Ghosh Ms. Simrin Hussain Ms. Pujal Musahib ….for the opposite party no.5 This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is at the instance of the auction purchaser and is directed against an order dated July 30, 2026 passed by the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal at Kolkata in Misc. Application Diary NO.735 of 2026. The opposite party nos.1 to 3 herein filed a transfer application before the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal being Transfer Application No.1 of 2025 praying for transfer of the S.A. No.317 of 2024 from Debts Recovery Tribunal – I Kolkata to Debts Recovery Tribunal – II Kolkata. Such application was disposed of by an order dated March 6, 2025. 2 Petitioner filed an application praying for recall of the order dated March 6, 2025, being Misc. Application Diary No.735 of 2026, which stood dismissed by the order impugned. The learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that without giving any opportunity to the petitioner to contest the transfer application, the learned Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal allowed the transfer application. Mr. Ray, learned senior advocate appearing for the opposite party nos.1 to 3 submits that after the transfer application was allowed the petitioner appeared before the transferee bench and filed several applications and participated in the proceedings on several occasions. Such submission is however disputed by the learned advocate for the petitioner and the learned advocate for the opposite party no.4. Heard the learned advocate for the respective parties and perused the materials placed. The learned Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, in the order impugned, specifically recorded that the transfer application was disposed on March 6, 2025 after hearing the learned counsel for the appellant in the transfer application and the respondent including the auction purchaser and the secured creditor. It was further recorded in the said order that the order on the transfer application was passed in the presence of the respective parties. The order was not challenged and had attained 3 finality. Thereafter, the parties to lis also participated in the hearing before the learned Debts Recovery Tribunal – II, Kolkata in the pending S.A. The learned Tribunal further took note of certain orders which was annexed in the miscellaneous application and upon going through the same the learned Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal recorded that the Debts Recovery Tribunal is continuously taking up the matter for hearing on different dates. Arguments were heard on different dates till January 29, 2026. After the matter was listed before the Debts Recovery Tribunal II on July 6, 2026, the application for recall of the order dated March 6, 2025 was filed on July 13, 2026. The learned advocate appearing for the petitioner could not dispute the aforesaid factual finding recorded by the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal. Since the order impugned does not suffer from any infirmity warranting interference under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, CO 2993 of 2026 stands dismissed. There will be no order as to costs. All parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. (Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.)