Wizard E-Marketing Private Limited & Anr. Vs Union of India & Ors. (Calcutta High Court)
Summary: The Calcutta High Court, in Wizard E-Marketing Private Limited & Anr. Vs Union of India & Ors., considered CAN 2 of 2026 seeking reimposition of an interim order granted on 14 July 2026. That order restrained the respondents from taking any benefit of Form-D, which recorded authentication as completed on 16 February 2023. The interim protection had been granted until the next hearing fixed for 23 July 2026.
The petitioners stated that the matter was listed on 23 July 2026 but could not be taken up, and no request was made to extend the interim order. When an extension was sought on 28 July 2026, the Court declined because the earlier protection had already expired. The petitioners consequently applied for reimposition rather than extension of the expired order.
The added respondent submitted that the initial order had been obtained in its absence because it had not been made a party to the writ application. It also alleged that the petitioners had been obtaining adjournments before the Tribunal on the strength of that protection. Nevertheless, it had no objection to the restraint being restored if the Tribunal could continue its proceedings without relying on Form-D.
Justice Krishna Rao noted that the Court had initially found a prima facie case in the petitioners’ favour. The interim order had not continued only because no timely extension had been sought. In view of the added respondent’s position, the Court considered reimposition of the restraint compatible with continuation of proceedings before the Tribunal.
The Court therefore reimposed the interim order dated 14 July 2026, restraining the respondents from taking any benefit of Form-D until the next hearing. It expressly permitted all respondents, including the added respondent, to proceed before the Tribunal without taking benefit of that form. CAN 2 of 2026 was disposed of and the writ matter was listed for 10 August 2026 under ‘Urgent Matters’. No final ruling was made on the underlying dispute.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
1. The petitioner has filed the present application being CAN 2 of 2026 praying for reimposition of the interim order granted by this Court on July 14, 2026.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that by an order dated July 14, 2026 this Court has restrained the respondents from taking any benefit of Form-D wherein it is mentioned that the authentication completed on February 16, 2023 till the next date of hearing and the next date of hearing was fixed on July 23, 2026. On the July 23, 2026, though the matter was listed but the matter could not reach and the petitioner also not prayed for extension of the interim order and accordingly, the interim order was not extended. The matter is listed on July 28, 2026 under the heading ‘To Be Mentioned’. On the said date, the learned counsel for the petitioners prays for extension of the interim order dated July 14, 2026 but this Court finds that the interim was till July 23, 2026 and thereafter the petitioners have not made any prayer for extension of the interim order and on July 28, 2026 there was no interim order and accordingly, this Court has not extended the interim order. Now the petitioner has come with an application for reimposition of the interim order.
3. Learned counsel for the added respondent submits that initially on July 14, 2026 the petitioners has obtained the interim order in the absence of the added respondent as the respondent was not made party to the writ application and on the basis of the said order, the petitioners are taking adjournment before the Tribunal. He submits that if this Court extends the interim order by directing that the Tribunal can proceed with the matter without taking into consideration of the Form-D, there is no objection for extension of the interim order.
4. In view of the above, this Court finds that initially this Court finds the prima facie case in favour of the petitioner, the interim was granted but subsequently no one has made any prayer for extension of the interim order, the interim order is not extended and when the petitioner prayed for extension of the interim order, the interim was already expired. Now the petitioner has come with an application for reimposition of the interim order. It is the specific stand of the added respondent that he will proceed with the matter without taking the benefit of the Form-D before the learned Tribunal.
5. In view of the above, the interim order dated July 14, 2026 is reimposed by restraining the respondents from taking any benefit of Form-D till the next date of hearing. It is made clear that the respondents including the added respondent are free to proceed with the proceeding without taking benefit of Form-D.
6. Accordingly, CAN 2 of 2026 is disposed of.
7. Let the matter appear on August 10, 2026 under the heading ‘Urgent Matters’.
8. All parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.
