K.P. Credit and Traders Pvt. Ltd. Vs Shri Anurag Rungta (Calcutta High Court)
The Calcutta High Court dealt with an appeal filed by the plaintiff against an order dated January 31, 2025 passed by a learned Single Judge dismissing the plaintiff’s application for injunction and attachment in a commercial suit for recovery of money lent and advanced. The appellant contended that it had advanced money to the respondent and relied upon documents showing that the respondent had deducted tax at source (TDS) on account of the appellant and deposited the same with the Income Tax authorities. According to the appellant, such deduction and deposit of TDS constituted an acknowledgment of the jural relationship and loan transaction between the parties.
The appellant further submitted that an application under Order XIIIA of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, as amended by the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, had earlier been dismissed by the Trial Judge and that a Special Leave Petition against such dismissal was pending. It was also pointed out that the respondent’s application under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure had been dismissed, and the Special Leave Petition challenging that order was also dismissed.
The respondent contended that the loan transaction had been arranged through one Mr. Anil Chowdhury and that the amount was payable to him rather than to the plaintiff. The respondent argued that there was no liability towards the appellant. Reliance was placed on the Supreme Court judgment in Raman Tech. And Process Engg. Co. And Anr. Vs. Solanki Traders to contend that attachment under Order XXXVIII Rule 5 CPC requires both a prima facie case and proof that the defendant is removing assets from the jurisdiction of the Court.
