A century of goodwill belongs to the Firm, not the family: What Calcutta HC’s Fox & Mandal ruling means
Calcutta High Court ruled that the goodwill and reputation of Fox & Mandal belong to the firm, not to the family of its former partners.
Calcutta High Court ruled that the goodwill and reputation of Fox & Mandal belong to the firm, not to the family of its former partners.
The petition raises a sensitive and classic judicial conundrum: Where does a genuine, conscious personal choice end, and where does administrative coercion begins?
The Collegium recommended appointment of Permanent Judges for High Courts of Punjab & Haryana and Calcutta and term extension for six Additional Judges of Calcutta High Court.
The Court held that although the rules of a competitive selection process cannot ordinarily be changed after the process has commenced, a uniform corrective measure adopted after expert scrutiny of defective questions will not necessarily amount to an impermissible change in the rules where the measure treats all candidates equally and causes no demonstrable prejudice. The decision also reinforces the limited scope of judicial review over expert assessment in competitive examinations.
The Supreme Court Collegium, in its meeting held on 6 August 2026, recommended the elevation of Justice V. Kameswar Rao, Justice Ravindra V. Ghuge, Justice Mahesh Chandra Tripathi and Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra as Chief Justices of the Patna, Calcutta, Bombay, and Punjab and Haryana High Courts, respectively.
A paper mill’s new owner took over under an approved resolution plan, but the electricity board still wanted over ₹2.5 crore in old dues and surcharges before switching the power back on. The Calcutta High Court said the clean slate principle doesn’t have exceptions for electricity bills.
The Court reiterated the golden rule of law that when a specific statutory provision to do certain act is codified under the statute, such an act must be and should be done in the same manner as codified under the statute or not at all. Any other mode is expressly forbidden in law.
The Court found serious doubts regarding the validity of the transfer and authenticity of payment records based on the applicant’s dual role as attorney and purchaser. The Court held that such disputed questions required a civil trial and not adjudication on affidavits. Hence, it dismissed the application, refusing to direct execution of the conveyance deed.
The Court held that under Section 74, CGST Act, each financial year is a separate unit for tax determination, and limitation periods apply independently. It found that the respondent-GST Authorities acted illegally by issuing a consolidated notice and ignoring documentary evidence provided by State Bank of India (SBI). Consequently, the impugned show-cause notice and order were declared void and without jurisdiction.
The case underscores that when attesting witnesses are unavailable, a will can still be proved through other admissible evidence under Sections 69 and 71 of the Evidence Act, provided the execution and testamentary capacity of the testator are established.
A suit for recovery of possession and mesne profits resulted in a decree dated 09-01-2024, which was declared a nullity by the Division Bench on the ground that it had been decided by a Judge lacking the requisite commercial roster under the Commercial Courts Act, 2015.
The President of India has appointed Justice Tapabrata Chakraborty, Judge of the Calcutta High Court, to perform the duties of the office of the Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court under Article 223 of the Constitution, consequent upon the retirement of Chief Justice Sujoy Paul on 20 June 2026.
“The prime concern and endeavour of law should be to secure justice on the basis of truth, which ought to be unearthed through a committed and competent investigating agency.” observes the Court.
Calcutta High Court held that an arbitrator unilaterally appointed by one party lacks inherent jurisdiction to adjudicate disputes between both the parties.
Newly elevated Judge of the Supreme Court of India, Justice Rajesh Bindal, celebrates his 62nd birthday today. Prior to being elevated to the Supreme Court, Justice Bindal was serving as the Chief Justice of Allahabad High Court.
It was alleged that the Calcutta High Court had arbitrarily cancelled the appointment of petitioners who were appointed as Assistant Teachers of Government aided primary school in the year 2017-2018.
Justice Aniruddha Bose who celebrates his 64th birthday today, had served the High Courts of Calcutta and Jharkhand as a Judge prior to being elevated to the Supreme Court in 2019.
Calcutta High Court observed that no sum due will be recoverable from any consumer after a period of two years from the date when such sum first became due unless such sum was shown continuously recoverable as arrears of charges of electricity supply.
Justice Prakash Shrivastava retires today after being the Chief Justice of Calcutta High Court for one and half years.
The Calcutta High Court quashed the imposition and recovery of penalty by the respondent authorities and directed them to refund the penalty amount and issue discharge certificate in favour of the petitioners.