High Court of Calcutta

30 judgments

Year:

Union of India v. A B P Private Limited

12 May 2023 · S. Ravi Bhat; Dipankar Das · 2023 INSC 525

The Supreme Court held that the Central Government's power to amend excise duty exemption notifications under Section 25(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1962, is subject to valid policy and public interest, and arbitrary withdrawal of exemptions is invalid.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant Central Excise Act, 1962 Section 25(1) exemption notification excise duty

Union of India v. A. B. P. Private Limited

12 May 2023 · S. Ravi Bhat; Dipankar Das

The Supreme Court held that the government’s power to amend or withdraw excise duty exemption notifications under Section 25(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1962, is subject to public interest and procedural fairness, upholding the original exemption notification and setting aside the unlawful amendment.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Central Excise Act, 1962 Section 25(1) excise duty exemption notification amendment

b031128417bc8ccc112a5029c2d177b13f53bceb94b994920a2712ab2f0c3316

12 May 2023 · K. Murari
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The court held that legislative amendment excluding tea manufacturing from 'production' lawfully terminated appellants' tax exemption rights, rejecting their claim based on legitimate expectation and upholding the government's withdrawal of exemption.

tax appeal_dismissed Significant legitimate expectation tax exemption production definition Bengal Finance Act

Tarok Nath Keshari v. Government of West Bengal

10 May 2023 · Abhoy S. Oka; Rajesh Biswal

The court upheld conviction under the Essential Commodities Act but modified the sentence by granting probation considering the long delay and good conduct of the petitioner.

criminal sentence_modified Significant Essential Commodities Act, 1955 Section 7(1)(k)(ii) Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 minimum sentence

e5648a2467e08e2c1e6c9cad238bbb4caf7b99f03f5dcb690de69b0b6ce7b931

04 May 2023 · M. R. Shah; Subeeb Khanna · 2023 INSC 494

The Supreme Court held that magistrates must direct police investigation upon receipt of a complaint under Section 156(3) CrPC without testing its credibility or bonafides, setting aside dismissal orders based on delay or lack of credibility.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 156(3) CrPC complaint application magistrate jurisdiction FIR registration

Aklash Bijoybagai v. Rajlil Choudhury

04 Apr 2023 · M. R. Shah; Subeeb Khanna

The court held that under Section 156(3) CrPC, magistrates may direct police investigation without probing complaint veracity, but must exercise judicial prudence to prevent abuse, remanding the matter for fresh consideration.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 156(3) CrPC FIR registration Magistrate's jurisdiction Investigation direction

Nikhil Chandra Mandal v. State of West Bengal

03 Mar 2023 · B. R. Gavai; Sanjay Karol · 2023 INSC 198

The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's conviction under Section 302 IPC, reinstating the trial court's acquittal due to insufficient and unreliable circumstantial evidence and extra-judicial confessions.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant circumstantial evidence extra-judicial confession Section 302 IPC benefit of doubt

cc7279b21c1cc070ae5bd53c6c92614443bef3d79a722aa566f455f9f592c5f4

30 Jan 2023 · Ajay Rastogi; S. K. Ribaku Mar

The High Court's dismissal of the quashing application was set aside, and the FIRs and criminal proceedings were quashed under Section 482 CrPC for lack of prima facie cognizable offences and abuse of process.

criminal appeal_allowed Significant Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR abuse of process cognizable offence

Sk. Md. Rafique v. Managing Committee, contai Rahamania High Madrasah and Others

06 Jun 2020 · 2020 INSC 3

The court held that minority educational institutions have constitutional rights to manage and administer their affairs autonomously, subject only to reasonable state regulation that does not destroy their essential character or autonomy.

constitutional appeal_allowed Significant Minority educational institutions Article 30 Constitution of India State regulation Madrasah management

Sk. Md. Rafique v. Managing Committee, Contai Rahamania High Madrasah and Others

06 Jun 2020

The Supreme Court upheld the validity of state regulation over minority madrasahs under the Madrasah Service Commission Act, 2008, balancing minority rights under Articles 29 and 30 with reasonable state control for proper administration.

constitutional appeal_allowed Significant Minority educational institutions Articles 29 and 30 Madrasah Service Commission Act State regulation

HEC-CS-1502-81 v. SCIL

18 Dec 2019 · L. N. Rao; Ajay Roychowdhury

The court upheld the unconditional and independent nature of bank guarantees, dismissing the appellant bank's appeal and directing payment upon lawful invocation despite underlying contractual disputes.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant bank guarantee invocation unconditional guarantee irrevocable guarantee

HEC-CS-1502-81 v. SCIL

18 Dec 2019 · L. N. Rao; Ajay Roychowdhury

The court upheld that an unconditional bank guarantee binds the bank to pay upon demand irrespective of disputes between the beneficiary and principal debtor, dismissing the appellant bank's appeal.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant bank guarantee unconditional guarantee invocation of guarantee liability of bank

West Bengal State v. Ranaghat & Habra Municipality

30 Nov 2019 · Krishna Murari; P. P. Nagaratna
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Calcutta High Court clarified and directed the prompt disbursement of compassionate allowance to families of deceased municipal employees in West Bengal, emphasizing adherence to government orders and preventing arbitrary denial.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant compassionate allowance deceased government employee West Bengal government orders municipal employees

80825ec9fbc679db4999515b6195434b92d6d99f8fc14b656de2a4aa3eb1de93

29 Nov 2019 · অবশো ভূষণ; নোতভন তসনহো · 2019 INSC 820

The court upheld the execution of a decree for possession of immovable property under Order XXI Rules 98-100 CPC, affirming the decree-holder’s right despite the respondent’s claim as legal heir, emphasizing the necessity of proving title and interest in execution proceedings.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Order XXI Rules 98, 99, 100 Specific Relief Act 1976 Sections 97-103 execution of decree immovable property

5f4187c5211ad6c8e2e2a4483b7726fb971486b5d3eabf7b98742ec9f6578432

29 Nov 2019 · Abhas Bhushan; Notavon Tsingho

The court upheld execution proceedings and delivery of possession under Order XXI CPC, holding that third parties must file independent suits under Section 101 of the 1976 Amendment Act to resist execution based on title or possession claims.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Order XXI Rules 97-103 Execution of decree Third party rights Section 101 CPC Amendment Act 1976

Naisima Nik v. United Ltd. and Ors.

26 Nov 2019 · Dr. Dhanya Y. Choudhury; Ajay Roychowdhury · 2019 INSC 1284

The Supreme Court upheld the landlord's eviction decree, ruling that heirs of a deceased tenant have tenancy rights only for five years post tenant's death under the Premises Tenancy Act, 1997, and cannot claim protection beyond that period.

property appeal_dismissed Significant Premises Tenancy Act 1997 Section 2(g) tenancy rights heirs of deceased tenant

Naisima Nik v. United Ltd. and Ors.

26 Nov 2019 · D. Y. Chandrachud; Ajay Rastogi

The court held that heirs of a deceased tenant who do not reside in the premises are not entitled to perpetual tenancy rights beyond the statutory five-year protection period under the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997, and upheld the landlord's right to eviction.

property appeal_dismissed Significant West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997 tenant definition heirs tenancy rights five-year protection period

6893f0c1f236479da91dfb91940f187df3da2fa926fa2ced98605614d3ec8653

22 Nov 2019 · L. Nager Rao; Hemant Gupta · 2019 INSC 1181
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Supreme Court held that the limitation period under Section 7(2) of the Premises Tenancy Act, 1997, for filing rent arrears claims is mandatory and courts cannot extend time, thereby upholding eviction orders for non-payment of rent beyond the limitation period.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Premises Tenancy Act 1997 Section 7(2) Limitation period Rent arrears

ab73cffbfdc760640a95267c0b4623e64f0f794fa0f671dc6c4145b68607f671

22 Nov 2019 · L. Nager Rao; Hemanta Dutta
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The court held that the limitation period under Section 7(2) of the Premises Tenancy Act, 1997, for eviction due to non-payment of rent arrears is mandatory and not extendable, thereby upholding eviction orders against tenants who failed to deposit rent within the prescribed time.

property appeal_allowed Significant Premises Tenancy Act, 1997 Section 7(2) Limitation period Rent arrears

Rajib Singh Harpal v. Others

14 Nov 2019 · Ashok Bhushan; Navin Sinha

The High Court upheld the validity of a probate granted in 1982, dismissing the petitioner's challenge based on non-citation and alleged forgery, affirming discretionary citation powers and locus standi requirements under the Indian Succession Act.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant probate Indian Succession Act, 1925 Section 263 Section 283