Calcutta High Court Monthy Digest: April 2025

Arbitration Clause Contained In Incomplete Memorandum Of Understanding Cannot Form Basis For Arbitration Proceedings: Calcutta HC

Case Title: M/S GREENBILT INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED VS M/S A B DINESH CONCRETE PRIVATE LIMITED

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Cal) 70

The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Shampa Sarkar has held that an arbitration clause in a memorandum of understanding that was not finalized, as indicated by the correspondences between the parties, cannot serve as the basis for initiating arbitration proceedings.

Merely Because Either Parent Is Non-Tribal, Child Cannot Be Denied Scheduled Tribe Certificate: Calcutta High Court

Case: SMT. NAZREEN BANU AND ANOTHER v THE ANDAMAN AND NICOBAR ADMINISTRATION AND OTHERS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Cal) 71

The Calcutta High Court's circuit bench at Port Blair has come to the aid of a NEET candidate who had not been issued a scheduled tribe certificate for the upcoming entrance examinations, even after being considered eligible for an ST certificate by the authorities.

Justice Aniruddha Roy held: The law on the subject prescribe that several factual factors are required to be considered to decide whether an individual can be considered as Scheduled Tribe or not. Merely because only either of the father or mother being non-tribal, one cannot be denied, the Scheduled Tribe certificate.

Calcutta High Court Allows 'Anjani Putra Sena' To Carry Out 'Shobha Yatra' On Ram Navami, Caps Attendance At 500

Case: Anjani Putra Sena Versus State of West Bengal & Ors

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Cal) 72

The Calcutta High Court has allowed a plea by the Anjani Putra Sena, seeking to carry out a 'Shobha Yatra Utsav' on the occasion of Ram Navami in Kolkata.

Justice Tirthankar Ghosh allowed the plea after imposing a slew of conditions on the organisers, including capping the attendance of the rally at 500 and on the timings of the rally.

Clause Empowering Contract Signatories To Resolve Disputes Does Not Constitute A Valid Arbitration Agreement Due To Lack Of Impartiality: Calcutta HC

Case Title:Balasore Alloys Limited vs. Flynt Mining LLP

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Cal) 73

The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Shampa Sarkar has held that merely because a dispute resolution mechanism is provided in a clause empowering the signatories to the contract to resolve the dispute, it cannot be inferred that the parties intended to refer the dispute to arbitration. Such a clause amounts to an in-house mechanism and not a reference to an impartial arbitral tribunal, especially when impartiality is clearly lacking as the very individuals who signed the contract are themselves empowered to decide the dispute.

Consumer Forums Not Legally Authorised To Issue Arrest Warrants: Calcutta High Court

Case: Abdul Manim Mollah v/s. The State of West Bengal & Anr.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Cal) 74

The Calcutta High Court has held that consumer forums, in exercise of their powers under the Consumer Protection Act, are not authorised to issue arrest warrants while imposing penalties under Sections 71 or 72 of the act.

Justice Suvra Ghosh held: Section 72 of the Act envisages penalty for non-compliance of the order of the District Commission, State Commission or National Commission, as the case may be, meaning thereby, that the Commission is empowered to initiate proceeding under section 72 of the Act for penalty for non-compliance of the order. The decree holder may take recourse to section 71 or section 72 of the Act for execution of the order passed by the Consumer Forum. The law does not authorize the Forum to issue warrant of arrest for enforcement of its order under the Code of Criminal Procedure. 

MSME Council Cannot Reject Arbitrable Claims Without Providing Any Reasons When Meditation U/S 18 Of MSME Act Has Failed: Calcutta HC

Case Title: UMC TECHNOLOGIES P LTD VS ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF POSTAL SERVICES, (RECRUITMENT)

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Cal) 75

The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Shampa Sarkar has held that the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSME) Facilitation Council cannot reject the arbitrable claims of the supplier without providing an opportunity to present evidence in support of the same, especially when mediation, as required under Section 18 of the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (MSME Act) has failed. As per law, the Council is then mandated to either adjudicate the arbitrable matter itself or refer it to an institution providing alternative dispute resolution services.

Party Claiming Benefit Under State's Welfare Scheme Cannot Challenge Its Restrictions Or Act To The Detriment Of Other Beneficiaries: Calcutta HC

Case: Smt. ParulbalaMondal Vs. The State of West Bengal &Ors

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Cal) 76

The Calcutta High Court has held that a party who claims the benefit of the various welfare schemes undertaken by the state cannot complain about the restrictions of such policies and act to the detriment of other beneficiaries under such schemes.

In this case, the court was dealing with a squatter who was a beneficiary of a housing scheme by the state, claiming more land than was allowed to be allotted under the said scheme.

Calcutta High Court Quashes Case Against Arnab Goswami, Republic TV Over Comments Made By Panelist Against Marwari Community

Case: Mr. Arnab Goswami & Anr. Vs. The State of West Bengal & Anr.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Cal) 77

The Calcutta High Court has quashed proceedings against Republic TV and it's Editor-In-Chief Arnab Goswami over allegedly hateful and bigoted remarks made by a panelist during a live show, targeting the Marwari community.

Subhojit Ghosh, a guest on show, caste aspersions on the Marwari community and it's alleged involvement in black marketing, including the black marketing of masks.

Central Govt Is Appropriate Authority For Industrial Disputes Involving Nationalized Companies Irrespective Of Contrary Notifications : Calcutta HC

Case Name: M/s. Braithwaite & Co. Limited v. Second Industrial Tribunal & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Cal) 78

The Calcutta High Court bench comprising of Justice Shampa Dutt (Paul) held that when an industry is nationalized and carried on under the authority of the Central Government pursuant to a statute like the Nationalization Act, the Central Government is the “appropriate government” under Section 2(a)(i) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 for adjudication of industrial disputes.

Merely Supplying Warrant Of Arrest Notifying Penal Sections Without Mentioning Substance Of Charge Violates Article 22 Of Constitution: Calcutta HC

Case: Central Bureau of Investigation v/s. Rajnikant Ojha

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Cal) 79

The Calcutta High Court has held that in the absence of notification of the substance of a warrant, the execution of the same becomes unconstitutional in terms of Article 22(2) of the Constitution read with Section 75 of the Cr P C.

Justice Suvra Ghosh affirmed the interim bail since the arrest memo neither contained reasons for arrest nor were the grounds of arrest communicated as per Article 22 of the Constitution.

Successor To Merger Transaction Can Invoke Arbitration Clause When All Rights And Liabilities Are Transferred: Calcutta High Court

Case Title: TATA CAPITAL LIMITED VS KRISHNA KANT TIWARI

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Cal) 80

The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Shampa Sarkar has held that once all liabilities, rights, and obligations are transferred to an entity through a merger approved by the competent forum, the arbitration clause contained in a loan agreement executed between the parties prior to the merger can be invoked by a third party that has acquired all such rights and liabilities post-merger.

Scheme Governing Auction Disputes Applies In All Auction Cases Unless Contrary Scheme Without Arbitration Clause Is Shown: Calcutta High Court

Case Title: SATYA NARAYAN SHAW VERSUS SOURAV GHOSH

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Cal) 81

The Calcutta High Court bench Justice Shampa Sarkar has held that when a scheme generally applicable to all auction related disputes contains an arbitration clause, that clause will govern disputes arising between the parties, unless a contrary scheme without such a clause is shown.

Substitution Of Arbitrator Can't Be Allowed When Petitioner Voluntarily Withdraws From Arbitral Proceedings: Calcutta High Court

Case Title: Ashok Kumar Bhuinya Proprietor Of A.K. Enterprise Vs State Of West Bengal

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Cal) 82

The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Shampa Sarkar has held that an application under Section 15 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act), seeking substitution of the arbitrator, cannot be allowed when the petitioner had voluntarily withdrawn from the arbitral proceedings and failed to participate despite being given ample opportunities, especially after a long lapse of time

Arbitration Clause Cannot Be Considered Binding If Mandatory Arbitration Reference Is Missing: Calcutta High Court

Case Title: Sunil Kumar Samanta Vs. Smt. Sikha Mondal

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Cal) 83

The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Shampa Sakar has held that if a clause in an agreement gives the parties discretion to refer the matter to arbitration after disputes have arisen, it cannot be construed as a binding arbitration agreement. Such invocation of the arbitration clause requires fresh consent of the other party before the matter can be referred to arbitration.

'Risk Factor Higher Than Loss Which May Be Caused': Calcutta HC Declines To Stay FSSAI Order Against Sale Of 'Prohibited Batch' Of Dabur Honey

Case: Dabur India Limited Vs. Union of India and others.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Cal) 84

The Calcutta High Court, presided over by Justice Om Narayan Rai has refused grant of interim relief/stay of operation in a writ petition filed by Dabur India Limited challenging the prohibition order issued by Food Safety and Standards Authority of India ('FSSAI') against a specific batch of "Dabur Honey” - Batch No. NP5819 which was manufactured on 13.02.2024 and marked with a “Use By” date of 12.08.2025.

Calcutta HC Declines PIL Seeking New Process For Scrutinising Poll Candidates, Alleging 'Foreigners' Were Participating In Bengal Elections

Case: MANIK FAKIR @ MANIK MONDAL VS UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. 

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Cal) 85

The Calcutta High Court has dismissed a public interest litigation seeking a new process for the scrutiny of candidates contesting the Bengal elections. The plea further alleged that foreigners were illegally obtaining Indian citizenship to participate in the state elections and manipulate the results.

Calcutta High Court Expresses 'Despair' Over Trial Court Initiating Contempt Proceedings Despite HC's Stay Order On Case

Case: Bimbadhar Mohakud & Anr. Vs. Bina Shah

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Cal) 86

The Calcutta High Court has taken exception to an order passed by the trial court, which initiated contempt proceedings for recovery of outstanding maintenance in a proceeding which had already been stayed by a coordinate bench of the High Court.

Justice Bibhas Ranjan De held:

"It has come to my utter despair that when the proceeding with respect to C.R 1344 of 2023 was already stayed by the Co-Ordinate Bench of this Hon'ble Court vide order dated 17.05.2024 then how come the Ld. Trial Judge initiate contempt proceedings in connection with the Misc. (Exe.) case no. 55 of 2024....it would be crystally clear that such orders were made without any sort of application of mind. Moreover, they appear to be written in a cyclostyle and mechanical manner which is highly unexpected from a responsible Judicial Officer, discharging his/her official duty."

While Disputes U/S 31 Of Specific Relief Act Are Arbitrable, Arbitral Awards Are Not Binding On Third Parties: Calcutta HC

Case Title: Jagat Singh Manot Versus The Municipal Commissioner, Kolkata Municipal Corporation And Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Cal) 87

The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Gaurang Kanth has held that although disputes relating to the cancellation of written instruments under Section 31 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 are arbitrable, the resulting awards are binding only on the parties involved and not on third parties who were not part of the arbitral proceedings.

Although Injunction Against Invocation Of Guarantee Cannot Be Granted, Court Can Grant Interim Protection If Prima Facie Case Is Established: Calcutta HC

Case Title: Gallant Equipment Pvt Ltd Vs Rashmi Metaliks Ltd

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Cal) 88

The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Shampa Sarkar has held that although an injunction against the invocation of a bank guarantee cannot normally be granted, if the petitioner establishes a prima facie case, the court should not hesitate to grant interim protection under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act).

Whether IRCTC's Revised Menu Alters Original Contract With Arbitration Clause Is For Arbitrator To Decide, Falls Outside Court's Jurisdiction: Calcutta HC

Case Title: M/S Doon's Caterers Vs M/S Indian Railway Catering And Tourism Corporation Limited

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Cal) 89

The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Shampa Sarkar has held that whether the subsequent revision of the original menu by IRCTC form part of the original contract containing an arbitration clause is a matter to be decided by the Arbitrator.

Such an issue falls outside the limited scope of the Court's jurisdiction under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act).

Employer Can't Alter Recorded D.O.B. Of Government Employee Beyond Prescribed 5-Year Period From Date Of Initial Appointment : Calcutta HC

Case Name : Sabita Sen v. State of West Bengal & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Cal) 90

The Calcutta High Court bench comprising of Aniruddha Roy, J. held that an employer cannot unilaterally alter the recorded date of birth of a government employee beyond the prescribed five-year limitation period from the date of joining.

Increase Of Working Hours Without Compensation In Government Mints, Calcutta High Court Finds Tribunal Award Reasonable

Case: Calcutta Mint Workers Union & Ors. v. National Industrial Tribunal, Kolkata & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Cal) 91

A single judge bench of Justice Shampa Dutt (Paul) of the Calcutta High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging the Industrial Tribunal's award that denied compensation to mint workers for increased working hours. The court found that extending working hours from 37½ to 44 hours per week as recommended by the 5th Pay Commission was reasonable, as it was accompanied by enhanced pay and benefits.

Proceedings U/S 37 A Of FEMA Can't Be Continued During Moratorium U/S 33(5) Of IBC: Calcutta High Court

Case Title: Anup Kumar Singh Vs Union of India & others.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Cal) 92

The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Jay Sengupta has held that once a liquidation order against the Corporate Debtor is passed, all proceedings including those pending at the time of such order under the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 (FEMA) cannot be continued, nor can any new proceedings be initiated, in view of the bar under Section 33(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (Code). This is further reinforced by the non obstante clause under Section 238 of the Code, which gives the Code overriding effect over conflicting provisions, including those of FEMA.

Appointment Of Arbitrator By GM Of Metro Rail In Dispute Between Railways & Contractor Is Barred U/S 12(5) Of Arbitration Act: Calcutta HC

Case Title: M/S Krishna Construction Vs The Chief General Manager Metro Railway And Ors

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Cal) 93

The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Shampa Sarkar has held that the appointment of an arbitrator by the General Manager of Metro Railways in a dispute between Metro Railways and the contractor is barred by Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act). Therefore, the General Manager cannot be permitted to appoint the arbitrator.

[POCSO Act] Trying To Grope Victim's Breast Doesn't Fall Under Definition Of Attempted Rape: Calcutta High Court

Case: Zomangaih @ Zohmangaiha -Vs.- State of West Bengal

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Cal) 94

The Calcutta High Court has held that the attempt of a man to grope a minor girl's breast in an inebriated state, did not tantamount to the offence of attempted rape under the POCSO act, but could be categorised as attempt to commit aggravated sexual assault due to there being no penetrative act.

No Interim Relief U/S 9 Of A&C Act Without Exceptional Circumstances After Conciliation Fails & Arbitration Starts Under MSME Act: Calcutta HC

Case Title: Lakhotia Metalizers Private Limited Vs Matashree Snacks Pvt. Ltd.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Cal) 95

The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Shampa Sarkar has held that once conciliation fails under the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (MSME Act), the Council may either conduct the arbitration itself or refer the matter to an arbitral institution. As per Section 18(3) of the MSME Act, the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act) apply to such arbitration proceedings.

Composite Reference To Arbitration Can Be Made For Acceptance Of Offer At Consolidated Price Across Different Locations: Calcutta HC

Case Title: Johnson Controls Hitachi Air Conditioning India Ltd. Vs M/S. Shapoorji Pallonji And Company Pvt Ltd.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Cal) 96

The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Shampa Sarkar has held that the very acceptance of an offer at a consolidated price for works to be executed at different locations proves that the work orders issued were treated as part of a single transaction by the parties through their conduct therefore under such circumstances a composite reference of all work orders can be made to arbitration.

Calcutta HC Directs Wife To Pay ₹1 Lakh To Husband For Defaming Him By Making False Allegations Of Remarriage In Newspaper

Case: Smti. Ananta vs. Sri Ramchander and another

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Cal) 97

The Calcutta High Court's circuit bench at Port Blair has directed a woman to pay Rs 1 lakh to her husband for allegedly defaming him by posting a public notice on his alleged remarriage in a local newspaper, without any evidence to that effect.