Court Cannot Legislate, Up To State Govt: Calcutta High Court Dismisses PIL Seeking Implementation Of Advocates' Protection Law

The Calcutta High Court has dismissed a public interest litigation seeking the implementation of various protective measures for advocates such as the Advocates Protection Act, which would provide safeguards for advocates to ensure their ability to perform their professional duties without fear or violence or harassment. The petitioner also sought protection to establish a dedicated...

The Benefit Of Section 14 Of The Limitation Act Can Be Invoked For Exclusion Of Time In A Proceeding Under Section 34 Of The Arbitration And Conciliation Act: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya has held that under Section 14 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the time spent in a writ petition on the same cause of action can be excluded from the limitation period for filing an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Brief Facts: Baid Power Services Private...

Calcutta High Court Weekly Round-Up 02 September To 09 September, 2024

NOMINAL INDEXRanajit Guha Roy and Anr. vs Sankar Kumar Halder Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 206Great Eastern Energy Corporation Ltd vs SRMB Srijan Ltd Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 207Allegations Of Fraudulent Signatures On Arbitration Agreements Must Be Decided By Arbitrator, Not Court Under Section 11: Calcutta High CourtCase Title: Ranajit Guha Roy and Anr. vs Sankar Kumar HalderCitation:...

Calcutta High Court Monthly Digest: August 2024

NOMINAL INDEXM/s Hooghly Building & Investment Co Ltd & anr v State Of WB & ors. Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 180Nandalal Verma Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors. Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 181Visa International Ltd. v Visa International Service Association & Anr. Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 182 Joyeeta Saha & Anr. -Vs- The State of West Bengal Citation: 2024...

The Court Can't Re-Appreciate Evidence Or Re-interpret Contracts While Examining Patent Illegality : Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya has held that the court cannot re-appreciate evidence under the guise of patent illegality, as per the proviso to Section 34 (2-A) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. It remarked that the Court cannot be sitting in appeal over the Tribunal's decision and cannot re-interpret the contract differently from...

Calcutta High Court Weekly Round-Up: 26th August To 1st September, 2024

NOMINAL INDEXDamodar Valley Corporation Vs BLA Projects Pvt. Ltd. Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 192Vishambhar Saran -Vs.- Bureau Of Immigration & Ors. Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 193Mayukh Biswas vs State of West Bengal Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 194Dr. Partha Biswas Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 195Sanjoy Das v Registrar General, Calcutta High...

RG Kar Rape-Murder: Calcutta High Court Calls For CBI's Report On "Very Nasty Comments" About Victim Written On Social Media

The Calcutta High Court has called for the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to submit its report regarding certain comments which were written on social media pertaining to the victim in the brutal RG Kar rape-murder case involving a trainee doctor who was raped and killed in the hospital premises.A division bench of Chief Justice TS Sivagnanam and Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharya...

RG Kar Rape Murder: Plea In Calcutta High Court Seeks Removal Of Police Commissioner Vineet Goyal Over Allegations Of Improper Probe

A plea has been moved before the Calcutta High Court seeking the removal of Kolkata Police Commissioner Vineet Goyal. The plea alleges that Goyal was unable to carry out a proper probe into the rape and murder of a resident doctor at RG Kar medical college and hospital. The petitioner also stated that Goyal revealed the name of the victim of the case to the media, which was illegal.The probe...

Lawyer Has Right To Represent Client, Need Not "Beg" To Appear Before Court: Calcutta High Court

While interrupting a lawyer who "begged" for permission to appear, the Calcutta High Court's Circuit Bench at Jalpaiguri comprising Justices Harish Tandon and Prasenjit Biswas observed that lawyers need not use expressions such as "begging to appear" while representing their clients before the court.The bench referred to such practices as 'relics' of the system's colonial past and commented...

Allegations Of Fraudulent Signatures On Arbitration Agreements Must Be Decided By Arbitrator, Not Court Under Section 11: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya has held that allegations of a party's signature on an arbitration agreement being obtained through fraud or misrepresentation are matters that can be decided by the arbitrator and can't be resolved by the court under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The bench further observed that the...

Interim Measures Under Section 9 Of Arbitration Act Justified If Applicant's Rights Are Not Protected From Third Parties: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya has held that granting interim measures under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, is justified if the Applicant's rights are not protected from third parties, as this could render the arbitral reference irretrievably infructuous. Brief Facts: Bengal Shelter Housing Development Limited...

No Prior Request Under Section 21 Needed For Section 11 Arbitration Applications: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya has held that an application under Section 11(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, does not require a prior request for reference to arbitration under Section 21. The bench held that invalidity of an arbitral proceeding due to the absence of prior notice under Section 21 and a unilateral appointment of...