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 LiveLaw (Cal) 183 Md. Abu Raihan v State of West Bengal & Ors. Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 184 Sashreek Constructors Private Limited vs. Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Citation :2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 185 Pranabesh Sarkar versus Superintendent CGST & CX Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 186 Commissioner Of Customs (Preventive), West Bengal Versus Bangari Bhola And Others Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 187Bhubaneshwari Seafood Private Limited And Anr. Vs Ugro Capital Limited Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 188 Dr. Sandip Ghosh & Anr. Vs. Union of India & Ors Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 189 M/S. Siemens Healthcare Private Limited Vs Sun Hospital And Ors. Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 190 Arup Mallick versus Commissioner, Commercial Taxes and State Tax, & Ors. Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 191Damodar Valley Corporation Vs BLA Projects Pvt. Ltd. Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 192 Vishambhar Saran -Vs.- Bureau Of Immigration & Ors. Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 193 Mayukh Biswas vs State of West Bengal Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 194 Dr. Partha Biswas Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 195 Sanjoy Das v Registrar General, Calcutta High Court Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 196 Sanjoy Das v State of West Bengal Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 197 Suklal Singh & Anr. -Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors. Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 198 Sajarul Rahaman And Anr vs Srei Equipment Finance Limited And Anr and Connected Matters Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 199 Debranjan Banerjee Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors. Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 200 Subal Makhal -Versus- Indian Red Cross Society & Ors. Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 201 Anjali Lahiri v State of West Bengal Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 202Orders/JudgementsWaqf 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 OTHERSCitation: 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.Hire-Purchase Agreement | Bank Need Not Re-Issue Vehicle's Registration Certificate After Sale Due To Default By Registered Owner: Calcutta HCCase: Nandalal Verma Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors.Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 181The Calcutta High Court has held that in hire-purchase agreements where a bank repossesses a vehicle and re-sells it due to a default by the vehicle's registered owner, the bank cannot be compelled to re-issue the vehicle's certificate of registration under Section 51(5) of the Motor Vehicles Act (MV Act).[S.3(2) Trademarks Act] Associate Managers In Trademark Registry Not Empowered To Pass Quasi-Judicial Orders: Calcutta High CourtCase: Visa International Ltd. v Visa International Service Association & Anr.Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 182The Calcutta High Court has held that associate managers appointed under Section 3(2) of the Trademarks Act cannot pass quasi-judicial orders since they were not empowered to do so by virtue of their appointment as contractual employees.A single bench of Justice Krishna Rao held:The Registrar dealing with an application under the Trade Marks Act is a quasi judicial and delegation of power under sub-section (2) of Section 3 is an administrative power and as such the Associate Managers appointed under sub-section 2 of Section 3 are not empowered to pass quasi judicial orders.[S.306 IPC] Momentary Disagreement Leading Person To Resort To Extremities Cannot Be Termed As Abetment To Suicide: Calcutta High CourtCase: Joyeeta Saha & Anr. -Vs- The State of West BengalCitation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 183The Calcutta High Court has recently quashed a case for abutment to suicide against a wife who was alleged of inducing her husband to commit suicide by failing to inform him of her previous marriage,In quashing the charges against her, a single bench of Justice Ananya Bandopadhyay held:Human psychology and mental state cannot be generally equated which varies from person to person. Egregious act on the part of a person from intractable emotions, depressions cannot be perceived or fathomed. One can be frenzied or hysterical even on minute and momentary...

Calcutta High Court Monthly Digest: August 2024

Srinjoy Das