Calcutta High Court Weekly Round-Up: 24th June To 30th June

NOMINAL INDEXIn the matter of: Christian Mac Durand 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 149Saila Ghosh Versus State of West Bengal 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 150VHP Dakshinbanga v Union of India 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 151Uphealth Holdings, INC. vs Dr. Syed Sabahat Azim & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 152Calcutta High Cout Quashes Case Against Swiss Tourist Who Entered India Without Arrival Stamp On Passport, Calls It Bona Fide MistakeCitation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 149Case: In the matter of: Christian Mac DurandThe Calcutta High Court Circuit Bench at Jalpaiguri has quashed proceedings under the Foreigners Act, against a Swiss tourist who entered India without a valid arrival stamp on his passport. The tourist was booked under Section 14 of the Foreigners Act. In quashing the case while holding the petitioner's actions to be a bona fide mistake, a single bench of Justice Bivas Pattanayak held: "During investigation no such mala fide intention of the petitioner transpired, save and except that the Passport was bereft of arrival stamp. From the materials placed before this Court, it is found that the case has resulted out of a bona fide mistake of the petitioner. In view of the above, the act of petitioner is protected by Section 15 of the Foreigners Act, 1946 which provides that no suit prosecution or other legal proceeding shall lie against any person for anything which is in good faith done or intended to be done under the Act."Raising Issue Of Non-Service Of Bills At Appellate Stage Not Permissible; Calcutta High Court Upholds 50% Interest Waiver On Property TaxCitation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 150Case Title: Saila Ghosh Versus State of West BengalThe Calcutta High Court, while dismissing the appeal of the assessee, upheld the 50% waiver of the interest on property tax. The bench of Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Gaurang Kanth has observed that the bills claiming enhanced property tax had not been raised during the arrears period are wholly unfounded, and the appellant ought not to be permitted to raise them at the appellate stage.Calcutta High Court Declines VHP's Plea Seeking Action Against CM Mamata Banerjee For Allegedly Objectionable Remarks Against MonkCitation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 151Case: VHP Dakshinbanga v Union of India The Calcutta High Court has declined to hear a public interest litigation (PIL) by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) against West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, for making allegedly objectionable remarks against a monk during her election rally for the recently concluded Lok Sabha polls. While dismissing the plea, a division bench of Chief Justice TS Sivagnanam and Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharya remarked: "This is an old story...we have got better work to do, we hope you (counsel for petitioner) have got better work to do. You are needed in the other courts, to get relief for your clients."Indian Courts Are Not Bound By Foreign Insolvency Judgments From Non-Reciprocating Countries: Calcutta High CourtCitation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 152Case Title: Uphealth Holdings, INC. vs Dr. Syed Sabahat Azim & Ors. The Calcutta High Court single judge bench of Justice Shampa Sarkar held that without a comprehensive cross-border insolvency framework, Indian courts do not recognize or enforce moratorium orders from non-reciprocating countries, such as the U.S., and thus are not obligated to stay ongoing suits due to such foreign proceedings.

Calcutta High Court Weekly Round-Up: 24th June To 30th June

Srinjoy Das