Arbitration Petition Seeking Stay Of Eviction Over Immovable Property Is “Suit For Land”; Outside Jurisdiction Of Original Side: Calcutta HC

The court said proceedings which directly impact possession of land cannot be decided by it merely because they arise from an arbitration agreement.

A Division Bench of Justices Debangsu Basak and Shabbar Rashidi in its order dated December 1, observed:

“Since we are of the view finding that the proceedings under the Act of 1996 a suit for land and that, this Hon'ble Court does not possess the requisite jurisdiction to try, entertain and determine such proceedings, we are not minded to enter into such issue in this appeal.”, the court observed.

The ruling came while allowing an appeal filed by the Department of Information Technology and Electronics, Government of West Bengal, which had challenged a single judge's order granting relief to Rolta Infrastructure and Technology Services Pvt Ltd. The case arose out of a dispute relating to a registered sub-lease deed executed on July 4, 2008, under which Rolta was granted sub-lease rights over five acres of land at Nonandanga, which fell under the East Kolkata Area Development Project in South 24 Parganas.

The department issued a notice on September 20, 2023 for termination of deed and eviction of Rolta Infrastructure from the property under the West Bengal Public Land (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act. The company disputed the allegations and asserted breach on part of the government. Rolta then approached the high court under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act, seeking a stay of the termination and eviction notice. It argued the dispute was arbitrable and interim protection was necessary pending arbitration.

The court noted that if the relief sought was granted to the company, it would directly restrain the government from rightfully recovering possession of the land. It relied on settled precedents and held that where the core issue relates to possession, title or interest in land, the proceedings squarely fall within the category of a suit for land under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent. It observed:

“In essence, the core dispute is with regard to the possession of the immovable property concerned. In such factual matrix, the proceedings under Section 9 of the Act of 1996 is to be considered as a proceeding in relation to an immovable property which is situated outside the territorial jurisdiction of the Original Side of this Hon'ble Court and to fall within the meaning of “suit for land” as envisaged under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent, 1865.”

Since the property in question was located outside the court's territorial jurisdiction of the original side, the court held the petition was itself unmaintainable. It allowed the appeal and set aside the single judge's order granting interim relief.

Case Title: Department of Information Technology and Electronics, Govt of West Bengal vs Rolta Infrastructure and Technology Services Pvt Ltd

Case Number: AO-COM/1/2024 with AP/827/2023

For Appellant: Sr. Advocate Suman Kumar Dutt with Advocates Anuj Singh, Shounak Mukhopadhya, Shrayashree Das, Paritosh Sinha, Tridibesh Dasgupta, Shubhayan Chakraborty

For Respondent: Sr. Advocate Ratnako Banerji with Advocates Rohit Mukherji, Pankaj Agarwal, Soham Saha