JUDGMENT Arindam Sinha, J. - Mr. Sarangi, learned senior advocate appears on behalf of writ petitioner. He hands up and relies on order dated 12th March, 2013 made in W.P.(C) no.2797 of 2013. Text of the order is reproduced below. 'Misc. Case No.2723 of 2013 Issue notice as above. Accept one set of process fee; As an interim measure it is directed that no coercive measure shall be taken against the petitioners pursuant to the notice under Annedure-14 till 5th April, 2013 subject to condition that the petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs. 1,30,00000/- (Rupees One Crore Thirty Lakhs) in two equal installments by 15th April, 2013 before the opposite party-Bank . The 1st installment shall be paid by 29th March, 2013 and the 2nd installment by 15th April, 2013. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application. He submits, the money was deposited with review applicant (bank) on 13th April, 2013, on his clients instruction, to be kept in a 'no lien' account. Soon thereafter, the loan account was assigned on 27th September, 2013. The money deposited, therefore, was to be refunded to his client but the bank held on it. 2. He submits further, 'no lien' account means simply that the bank could not exercise lien over that account. However, the bank could not have kept the money without paying interest thereon. On query from Court he submits that his client was unaware that this money was to be refunded, which is why in then pending said writ petition, no application was made for refund. Nevertheless, the bank having held on to money to have been refunded since, it itself assigned the credit facility account to the asset reconstruction company, is liable to pay interest. 3. Mr. Dey, learned advocate appears on behalf of applicant bank and prays for adjournment to demonstrate that the banking rules provide for no interest accrual in 'no lien' account. 4. List on 20th December, 2022.