{"id":313295,"date":"2024-02-07T10:00:33","date_gmt":"2024-02-07T04:30:33","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=313295"},"modified":"2024-02-16T15:20:28","modified_gmt":"2024-02-16T09:50:28","slug":"cal-hc-refers-matter-to-chief-justice-for-resolution-by-third-judge-due-to-difference-of-opinion-on-question-of-fact-scc-blog","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/07\/cal-hc-refers-matter-to-chief-justice-for-resolution-by-third-judge-due-to-difference-of-opinion-on-question-of-fact-scc-blog\/","title":{"rendered":"Unanimity on Questions of Law; differences on Questions of Facts: Division Bench refers matter to Calcutta High Court Chief Justice for resolution by third Judge"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Calcutta High Court:<\/span> In an appeal was filed against the dismissal of the application for interim mesne profits during the pendency of the eviction suit, a division bench comprising of I.P. Mukerji*<\/span> and Biswaroop Chowdhury,* JJ.<\/span>, held that the Court’s decision regarding questions of law is unanimous, but there are differences with regards to question of facts, necessitating referral to a third Judge for resolution. The Court referred the matter to the Chief Justice for referral to a third Judge to resolve the factual differences between the judges.<\/p>\n

Factual Matrix<\/p>\n

In the instant matter, the appellant-plaintiff filed a suit for eviction and determination of mesne profits against respondents-defendants for a shop room. The appellant also filed an application seeking interim mesne profits during the pendency of the suit. The application for interim mesne profits was dismissed by a single judge, leading to the current appeal.<\/p>\n

The original tenant passed away in 2006, leaving behind the respondent 1 (his widow) and the second 2 (his daughter). The appellant claimed that the tenancy was commercial in nature and ended on 12-07-2011, as per Section 2(g)<\/a> of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997<\/a>. The appellant filed the suit for recovery of possession and mesne profits from 12-07-2011, considering the respondents as trespassers. The respondents claimed their right to occupy the premises through an execution proceeding in a previous suit. The appellant argued that the respondents’ occupation was commercial, supported by various documents. Disputes arose regarding the valuation of the suit and the nature of occupancy.<\/p>\n

Moot Point<\/p>\n

Whether the court, during the pendency of a suit for eviction and determination of mesne profits, can order interim mesne profits or occupation charges to be paid to the plaintiff by the defendant?<\/p>\n

Court’s Assessment<\/p>\n

The Court unanimously agreed on the following question of law:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. \n

    The principle allowing for the award of mesne profits or occupation charges pending appeal by the defendant against an eviction order, as established in Atma Ram Properties (P) Ltd. v. Federal Motors (P) Ltd., is applicable in suits for eviction against occupiers pending trial.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  2. \n

    This principle, subject to the plaintiff establishing prima facie that the defendant has practically no defense to the claim, allows for the award of mesne profits or occupation charges need not be based on the market value of the property but should satisfy the test of reasonableness<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    However, there were differences between the judges on certain question of facts, such as<\/p>\n

      \n
    1. \n

      Disagreement regarding the nature of occupation charges and the time period for payment.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

    2. \n

      The appellant failed to establish a strong prima facie case suggesting that the respondents have no defense to their claim in the suit.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

    3. \n

      Issues such as ownership of the suit property, nature of tenancy, determination of the respondents’ status under Order 21 Rule 97<\/a>–105<\/a> of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908<\/a> (CPC), and the correct pecuniary jurisdiction of the suit can only be determined at the trial.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

      Justice Biswaroop Chowdhury held that the respondents, claiming to be tenants under the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997<\/a>, should pay a provisional fair rent of Rs. 2000 per month from a specified date. Justice I.P. Mukerji held that the respondents became trespassers from 2011 and are liable to pay reasonable occupation charges for a period not exceeding three years prior to the institution of the suit.<\/p>\n

      Court’s Decision<\/p>\n

      Since the judges agreed on the monthly occupation charges of Rs. 2000, the Court directed the respondents to pay such charges from a specified date, payable in advance by the 15th of each month. The matter was referred to the Chief Justice to appoint a third Judge to rule on the factual differences between the judges.<\/p>\n

      [Debonair Vanijya (P) Ltd.<\/span> v. Eshrat Jahan<\/span>, 2024 SCC OnLine Cal 1178<\/a>, order dated 05-02-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n

      *Judgment by Justice I. P. Mukerji, Justice Biswaroop Chowdhury<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n\n

      Advocates who appeared in this case :<\/p>\n

      Mr. Surajit Nath Mitra, Sr. Adv., Mr. Sankarsan Sarkar, Mr. Mehaboob Rahman and Mr. Shayak Mitra, Counsel for the Appellants<\/p>\n

      Mr. Shyamal Chakraborty Mr. Debajyoti Mondal, Ms. Anjana Das and Mr. Sayan Ghosh, Counsel for the Respondents<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

      The Division bench agreed to the monthly occupation charges but disagreed on the time period for payment.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67514,"featured_media":290502,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[2689,59398,59397,47202,30608,65126],"class_list":["post-313295","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-Calcutta_High_Court","tag-justice-biswaroop-chowdhury","tag-justice-i-p-mukerji","tag-question-of-fact","tag-question-of-law","tag-referral-of-matter"],"yoast_head":"\nCalcutta High Court refers matter to Chief Justice for resolution by third Judge due to difference of opinion on question of fact | SCC Blog<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Calcutta High Court referred matter to Chief Justice for resolution by third Judge due to difference of opinion on question of fact.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/07\/cal-hc-refers-matter-to-chief-justice-for-resolution-by-third-judge-due-to-difference-of-opinion-on-question-of-fact-scc-blog\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Unanimity on Questions of Law; differences on Questions of Facts: Division Bench refers matter to Calcutta High Court Chief Justice for resolution by third Judge\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Calcutta High Court referred matter to Chief Justice for resolution by third Judge due to difference of opinion on question of fact.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/07\/cal-hc-refers-matter-to-chief-justice-for-resolution-by-third-judge-due-to-difference-of-opinion-on-question-of-fact-scc-blog\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2024-02-07T04:30:33+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2024-02-16T09:50:28+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"886\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"590\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Ritu\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Unanimity on Questions of Law; differences on Questions of Facts: Division Bench refers matter to Calcutta High Court Chief Justice for resolution by third Judge\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Ritu\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"3 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/07\/cal-hc-refers-matter-to-chief-justice-for-resolution-by-third-judge-due-to-difference-of-opinion-on-question-of-fact-scc-blog\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/07\/cal-hc-refers-matter-to-chief-justice-for-resolution-by-third-judge-due-to-difference-of-opinion-on-question-of-fact-scc-blog\/\",\"name\":\"Calcutta High Court refers matter to Chief Justice for resolution by third Judge due to difference of opinion on question of fact | SCC Blog\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/07\/cal-hc-refers-matter-to-chief-justice-for-resolution-by-third-judge-due-to-difference-of-opinion-on-question-of-fact-scc-blog\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/07\/cal-hc-refers-matter-to-chief-justice-for-resolution-by-third-judge-due-to-difference-of-opinion-on-question-of-fact-scc-blog\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2024-02-07T04:30:33+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2024-02-16T09:50:28+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/392f265bae2f48f0f0d02b8e0e9015b9\"},\"description\":\"Calcutta High Court referred matter to Chief Justice for resolution by third Judge due to difference of opinion on question of fact.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/07\/cal-hc-refers-matter-to-chief-justice-for-resolution-by-third-judge-due-to-difference-of-opinion-on-question-of-fact-scc-blog\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/07\/cal-hc-refers-matter-to-chief-justice-for-resolution-by-third-judge-due-to-difference-of-opinion-on-question-of-fact-scc-blog\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/07\/cal-hc-refers-matter-to-chief-justice-for-resolution-by-third-judge-due-to-difference-of-opinion-on-question-of-fact-scc-blog\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"calcutta high court\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/07\/cal-hc-refers-matter-to-chief-justice-for-resolution-by-third-judge-due-to-difference-of-opinion-on-question-of-fact-scc-blog\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Unanimity on Questions of Law; differences on Questions of Facts: Division Bench refers matter to Calcutta High Court Chief Justice for resolution by third Judge\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/392f265bae2f48f0f0d02b8e0e9015b9\",\"name\":\"Ritu\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c47318594774c1fe55e3e8c85dcd1909276373d9bf11730032fc1a7d05d56a47?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c47318594774c1fe55e3e8c85dcd1909276373d9bf11730032fc1a7d05d56a47?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Ritu\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_7\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Calcutta High Court refers matter to Chief Justice for resolution by third Judge due to difference of opinion on question of fact | SCC Blog","description":"Calcutta High Court referred matter to Chief Justice for resolution by third Judge due to difference of opinion on question of fact.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/07\/cal-hc-refers-matter-to-chief-justice-for-resolution-by-third-judge-due-to-difference-of-opinion-on-question-of-fact-scc-blog\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Unanimity on Questions of Law; differences on Questions of Facts: Division Bench refers matter to Calcutta High Court Chief Justice for resolution by third Judge","og_description":"Calcutta High Court referred matter to Chief Justice for resolution by third Judge due to difference of opinion on question of fact.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/07\/cal-hc-refers-matter-to-chief-justice-for-resolution-by-third-judge-due-to-difference-of-opinion-on-question-of-fact-scc-blog\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2024-02-07T04:30:33+00:00","article_modified_time":"2024-02-16T09:50:28+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Ritu","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Unanimity on Questions of Law; differences on Questions of Facts: Division Bench refers matter to Calcutta High Court Chief Justice for resolution by third Judge","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Ritu","Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/07\/cal-hc-refers-matter-to-chief-justice-for-resolution-by-third-judge-due-to-difference-of-opinion-on-question-of-fact-scc-blog\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/07\/cal-hc-refers-matter-to-chief-justice-for-resolution-by-third-judge-due-to-difference-of-opinion-on-question-of-fact-scc-blog\/","name":"Calcutta High Court refers matter to Chief Justice for resolution by third Judge due to difference of opinion on question of fact | SCC Blog","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/07\/cal-hc-refers-matter-to-chief-justice-for-resolution-by-third-judge-due-to-difference-of-opinion-on-question-of-fact-scc-blog\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/07\/cal-hc-refers-matter-to-chief-justice-for-resolution-by-third-judge-due-to-difference-of-opinion-on-question-of-fact-scc-blog\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp","datePublished":"2024-02-07T04:30:33+00:00","dateModified":"2024-02-16T09:50:28+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/392f265bae2f48f0f0d02b8e0e9015b9"},"description":"Calcutta High Court referred matter to Chief Justice for resolution by third Judge due to difference of opinion on question of fact.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/07\/cal-hc-refers-matter-to-chief-justice-for-resolution-by-third-judge-due-to-difference-of-opinion-on-question-of-fact-scc-blog\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/07\/cal-hc-refers-matter-to-chief-justice-for-resolution-by-third-judge-due-to-difference-of-opinion-on-question-of-fact-scc-blog\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/07\/cal-hc-refers-matter-to-chief-justice-for-resolution-by-third-judge-due-to-difference-of-opinion-on-question-of-fact-scc-blog\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"calcutta high court"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/07\/cal-hc-refers-matter-to-chief-justice-for-resolution-by-third-judge-due-to-difference-of-opinion-on-question-of-fact-scc-blog\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Unanimity on Questions of Law; differences on Questions of Facts: Division Bench refers matter to Calcutta High Court Chief Justice for resolution by third Judge"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/392f265bae2f48f0f0d02b8e0e9015b9","name":"Ritu","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c47318594774c1fe55e3e8c85dcd1909276373d9bf11730032fc1a7d05d56a47?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c47318594774c1fe55e3e8c85dcd1909276373d9bf11730032fc1a7d05d56a47?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Ritu"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_7\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":296978,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/07\/17\/income-of-the-club-involving-contributors-and-participators-is-not-taxable-calcutta-high-court\/","url_meta":{"origin":313295,"position":0},"title":"Income of a club involving contributors and participators is not taxable: Calcutta High Court","author":"Ritu","date":"July 17, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cThe members of the club are seen both as contributors and participators. The club and its members are seen as one person. Usually a member has to pay to avail of the services and facilities provided by the club.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"calcutta high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":359139,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/09\/05\/justice-ip-mukerji-chief-justice-of-meghalaya-high-court-retires\/","url_meta":{"origin":313295,"position":1},"title":"13th Chief Justice of Meghalaya High Court, Justice I.P. Mukerji, retires after a tenure of 11 months","author":"Sucheta","date":"September 5, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"Justice Indra Prasanna Mukerji was appointed as a Permanent Judge of Calcutta High Court on 18-5-2009. He was subsequently appointed as Meghalaya High Court\u2019s Chief Justice in September 2024 and took oath of office on 3-10-2024.","rel":"","context":"In "Know thy Judge"","block_context":{"text":"Know thy Judge","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/judges-information\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Chief Justice of Meghalaya High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/Chief-Justice-of-Meghalaya-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/Chief-Justice-of-Meghalaya-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/Chief-Justice-of-Meghalaya-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/Chief-Justice-of-Meghalaya-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":253712,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/06\/bengal-post-poll-violence-5\/","url_meta":{"origin":313295,"position":2},"title":"[Bengal Post Poll Violence]Cal HC | Retired Chief Justice of Calcutta HC Manjula Chellur to monitor SIT in the Poll violence cases","author":"Editor","date":"September 6, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Calcutta High Court: The Full Bench of Rajesh Bindal, ACJ and\u00a0I.P. Mukerji, Harish Tandon, Soumen Sen and Subrata Talukdar, JJ., in furtherance to the order passed on 19-08-2021 which had directed the constitution of SIT to monitor the investigation of specific categories of cases monitored by a retired Hon\u2019ble Supreme\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/calcutta-court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/calcutta-court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/calcutta-court.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/calcutta-court.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/calcutta-court.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":317834,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/20\/commercial-courts-act-2015-takes-away-any-substantive-or-procedural-right-of-appeal-calcutta-high-court-scc-times\/","url_meta":{"origin":313295,"position":3},"title":"Commercial Courts Act expressly takes away any substantive or procedural right of appeal; Calcutta High Court dismisses appeal","author":"Ritu","date":"March 20, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Calcutta High Court relied on Section 13 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, which explicitly limits the right of appeal to judgments, decrees, and orders specified therein.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Calcutta High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Calcutta-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Calcutta-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Calcutta-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Calcutta-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":302311,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/09\/25\/calcutta-hc-grants-stay-on-constitution-of-high-level-enquiry-committee-amid-pending-appeal-scc-blog\/","url_meta":{"origin":313295,"position":4},"title":"Calcutta High Court grants stay on constitution of \u201cHigh-Level Enquiry Committee\u201d pending appeal in Arbitration case","author":"Ritu","date":"September 25, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Calcutta High Court allowed Section 34 application of the railways and directed that the Court hearing Section 34 application should not be guided by any remarks made by the Judge in the impugned order.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"calcutta high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":311987,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/01\/23\/cal-hc-establishes-appeals-maintainability-under-order-431a-read-with-section-104-of-cpc-scc-blog\/","url_meta":{"origin":313295,"position":5},"title":"Calcutta High Court establishes appeal\u2019s maintainability under Order 43(1)(a) and Section 104 of CPC, refers to appropriate jurisdiction","author":"Ritu","date":"January 23, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Calcutta High Court referred the appeal to the bench with jurisdiction over first appeals from orders under Order 43(1)(a) passed by a regular court of civil jurisdiction, not by a special or commercial court.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"calcutta high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/313295","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67514"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=313295"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/313295\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/290502"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=313295"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=313295"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=313295"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}