Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010037722026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/949/2026 SMTI SARU BORAH W/O LATE BISHEWAR BORAH, VILL AND P.O.- RANGPURIA, NORTH LAKHIMPUR, DIST- LAKHIMPUR, PIN-787032, ASSAM VERSUS THE UNITED BANK OF INDIA AND 6 ORS. (PRESENTLY PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK), KOLKATA ZONAL OFFICE AT 11, HEMANTA BASU SARANI, KOLKATA-700001 2:THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER (RECOVERY) UNITED BANK OF INDIA (PRESENTLY PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK) H.O. 11 HEMANTA BASU SARANI KOLKATA-700001 3:THE CHIEF REGIONAL MANAGER UNITED BANK OF INDIA DIBRUGARH REGIONAL OFFICE (PRESENTLY PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK) R.K. BORDOLOI PATH DIBRUGARH-786001 4:THE REGIONAL MANAGER UNITED BANK OF INDIA DIBRUGARH REGIONAL OFFICE (PRESENTLY PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK) R.K. BORDOLOI PATH DIBRUGARH-786001 5:THE BRANCH MANAGER Page No.# 2/3 UNITED BANK OF INDIA HATILUNG BRANCH (PRESENTLY PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK) NORTH LAKHIMPUR LAKHIMPUR PIN-787031 ASSAM 6:TILESWAR DAIMARI THE BRANCH MANAGER UNITED BANK OF INDIA (PRESENTLY PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK) HATILUNG BRANCH NORTH LAKHIMPUR LAKHIMPUR PIN- 787031 ASSAM 7:M/S P.B. TRADERS PROPRIETOR SRI PRONAB BIKASH BORAH R/O VILL- RONGPURIA P.O.- RONGPURIA P.S.- NORTH LAKHIMPUR DIST- LKAHIMPUR PIN-787031 ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A DHAR, MD F FARIDI,A WAHID Advocate for the Respondent : , BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER Date : 13 .05. 2026 Heard Mr. A. Dhar, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Mr. A. Parvez, learned counsel appearing for Punjab National Bank, who submits that this interlocutory application has been filed in the name of United Bank of India. However, he submits that since the said bank has merged with Panjab National Bank in the year 2021 and as well the interlocutory application ought to have been filed in the name of Punjab National Bank. He further submits that in this case he has also filed the caveat, however, since the name of Punjab National Page No.# 3/3 Bank has not been mentioned as caveator. Therefore he submits that he has not received notice. 2. On the other hand learned counsel for the applicant submits that though this appeal has been filed in the name of the United Bank of India, however in the cause title of the memo of appeal as well as the interlocutory application, it has been specifically mentioned therein that the said bank is presently known as Punjab National Bank. 3. Be that as it may, the learned counsel for the applicant submits that he is not pressing the instant interlocutory application. Hence, this interlocutory application is dismissed on not being pressed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant