Calcutta High Court Weekly Round-Up 29th July To 02nd August 2024

NOMINAL INDEXSubhash Tiwari & Anr. Vs. The State of West Bengal & Anr Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 178The State Of West Bengal Vs Bijan Behari Chowdhury 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 179M/S. HOOGHLY BUILDING & INVESTMENT COMPANY LIMITED AND ANOTHER VERSUS THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND OTHERS Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 180Calcutta HC Declines To Quash Case Against Man Who Allegedly Insulted Son-In-Law's Tribe, Said "Tum Log Chhota Jaat Hai"Case: Subhash Tiwari & Anr. Vs. The State of West Bengal & AnrCitation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 178The Calcutta High Court has declined to quash a case initiated under the Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, (SC/ST Act) against a man who allegedly insulted his son-in-law using casteist slurs in his locality when the complainant had gone to bring his wife back from her maternal home. It was alleged that the accused said: “tum jaisa nich jat ke sath meri beti nehi jayegi...Bhumij log nich aur chhuddar hota hai," (my daughter will not go with a lower caste like you) in the confines of his home, while he physically assaulted the petitioner and said “tum log chhotta jat hai” (you people are lower caste) outside in his locality.Arbitrator's Award For Compensation For Excess Work And Business Loss Without Sufficient Evidence Is Perverse, Contrary To Fundamental Policy: Calcutta High CourtCase Title: The State Of West Bengal Vs Bijan Behari ChowdhuryCitation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 179The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya has held that the arbitrator's decision to award compensation to the claimant for excess work and business loss, without sufficient evidence to support these claims, is perverse and contrary to the fundamental policy of Indian law.The matter pertained to an arbitral award that granted monetary claims to the claimant. The Petitioner argued that the award lacked any reasoning and that the arbitrator despite framing certain issues failed to decide on any of them. It contended that the monetary amounts awarded were based on no material evidence. The Petitioner argued that the arbitrator's findings were unjustified as they were based solely on the Respondent not presenting independent evidence through oral witnesses or documentary evidence. The claimant, according to the Petitioner, must rely solely on its own evidence and materials to support its case. Therefore, the premise that the award was justified due to the Respondent failure to provide evidence was legally untenable.Waqf Property Status Permanent, Mutawalli Leases Void Without Waqf Board Approval: Calcutta High CourtCase Title: M/S. HOOGHLY BUILDING & INVESTMENT COMPANY LIMITED AND ANOTHER VERSUS THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND OTHERS Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 180The Calcutta High Court division bench of Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam and Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya has held that once a property is designated as Waqf, it remains so indefinitely. It held that Mutawalli cannot enter into a lease of Waqf property without prior approval from the Waqf Board.Therefore, the bench held that any agreements or understandings, whether written or oral, regarding the property are entirely unauthorized by law and void from the outset.

Calcutta High Court Weekly Round-Up 29th July To 02nd August 2024

Srinjoy Das