Calcutta High Court judgments

Freezing an entire account is disproportionate when only Rs. 89,415 of Rs. 1.75 lakh alleged fraud entered it, the holder wasn't among named fraudsters, and no investigation linked the account to the crime. The ruling protects legitimate account holders from blanket freezes on tenuous police directions and affirms writ jurisdiction where the account and branch are located.

Calcutta High Court quashed eviction orders under SARFAESI Act Section 14 where an HFC sought possession for a Rs 16.56 lakh debt, below the Rs 20 lakh jurisdictional floor for NBFCs/HFCs. The court ruled the Magistrate lacked jurisdiction, directing restoration of possession within 15 days and affirming the threshold as a mandatory precondition for enforcement.

Calcutta HC held Customs officers may sample imported food under Section 144 for tariff classification even with food safety concerns, letting revenue probe duty evasion without waiting for separate food safety clearance.

Under Section 11(6A) the Calcutta HC limited the referral court’s role to checking arbitration agreement existence and timeliness, barring inquiry into merits or consumer forum orders. Thus the developer’s non consumer claims remain arbitrable despite any consumer forum order, affecting developers and homebuyers.

The Calcutta High Court quashed lower maintenance orders, ruling that any award under the PWDV Act must be grounded in sworn affidavits of both parties’ assets and liabilities. The decision forces litigants in domestic violence cases to furnish full financial disclosures before maintenance can be granted, impacting spouses and children seeking support.

The Calcutta High Court ruled that the first proviso to Section 36(1)(viia)(a) of the Income tax Act 1961 grants banks an option to claim additional provision for doubtful or loss assets, allowing cumulative deduction within statutory limits. This clarifies that the proviso is not an alternative to the main clause, benefitting banking assessees seeking higher tax deductions.

The Calcutta High Court directed police to ensure senior citizens’ entry into their self-acquired property within three days’ notice, providing assistance if obstructed, while preserving any ongoing matrimonial proceedings.

The Calcutta HC held Section 34 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 inapplicable to partition suits where co-sharers have unity of possession, overturning the lower court’s order and clarifying that such suits must be decided on merits in partition proceeding.

The Calcutta High Court ruled that overlapping maintenance under the PWDV Act and Hindu Marriage Act must be set-off to prevent double recovery, and that PWDV welfare proceedings cannot be quashed for procedural lapses, protecting recipients and children’s interests.

The Calcutta High Court held that COVID-19 limitation relaxations cannot revive suits time-barred pre-pandemic, dismissing an appeal delayed by 2179 days and ruling that unsubstantiated age/ill-health claims lack sufficient cause under Section 5 Limitation Act.

Calcutta HC held that a student with 62.61% attendance is ineligible for condonation under university rules requiring a 65% threshold for B.Com-LLB courses. The judgment upholds the attendance requirement, orders publication of the withheld results, and affects students seeking condonation for insufficient attendance.

The Calcutta High Court held that suppression of material facts and lack of clean hands disentitle a wife to maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C, setting aside the denial and ordering a trial, thus upholding clean hands doctrine in maintenance cases.

Non-deposit of 75% award under Sec 19 MSME Act 2006 renders a Sec 34 challenge under Arbitration Act 1996 non-entertainable, Calcutta HC ruled, and without pre-deposit restoration applications are ineffective, clarifying jurisdictional bar for MSME arbitration.

The Calcutta High Court held that emails showing consensus ad idem can support a specific performance injunction without strict Section 65B compliance, clarifying that informal electronic evidence may prove contracts in property disputes.

The Calcutta High Court barred amendment of pleadings after trial commencement if it defeats the opposite party’s accrued rights, overturning a trial court’s order in a partition suit and upholding Order VI Rule 17 CPC’s proviso to protect parties from prejudicial late amendments.

The Calcutta High Court held that arbitral tribunals may grant Section 17 interim measures without first deciding Section 16 jurisdictional objections, treating such orders as neutral fact finding steps to preserve the status quo and enable relief in arbitration.

Calcutta HC quashed garnishee orders against SBI, holding bank cannot be deemed a defaulter under ESI Act if the customer’s account is inoperative and zero-balance, shielding banks from ESI liability, curbing recovery officer’s power to attach funds.

The Calcutta HC ruled that school authorities must weigh all evidence under the preponderance of probabilities standard and cannot dismiss teaching staff appointments based solely on a 1988 inspection report. The ruling protects employees appointed between 1995-97 seeking regularization of their service.

The Calcutta HC held that res judicata does not bar a later Section 65B affidavit for distinct documents, allowing supplementary electronic evidence. This aids litigants in insurance claims by allowing extra digital records without procedural bar.

Calcutta HC held that a pending title suit challenging the lease deed underlying an arbitral eviction award does not warrant a stay of execution under Order 21 Rule 29 CPC. Execution may proceed despite the title suit, affecting debtors seeking to halt eviction.

Calcutta HC vacated the ex parte order against influencers who posted heavy-metal test results of an Ayurvedic product. The decision sets a high bar for interim injunctions in defamation, shielding critics who test products for safety.

Absorption of contractual technical staff must consider original qualification at appointment, not just the redesignated post, ruled Calcutta HC. The ruling protects service quality under the National Policy for ICT in Judiciary and impacts district court technical staff.

The Calcutta HC affirmed a monthly maintenance of Rs. 3,000 for a major son with 70% disability, ruling that the father's obligation under Section 125(1)(c) CrPC does not cease on attaining majority. The decision reinforces the statutory right of disabled adult children to support, impacting families across West Bengal.

The Calcutta HC ruled that a separate suit to set aside a consent decree under Order 23 Rule 3 CPC is not maintainable; only the court that recorded the decree can decide its validity. This bars parallel litigation and upholds the sanctity of settlement agreements.