Eviction and Recovery of Possession – Rent Arrears – Plaintiff sought a decree for eviction and recovery of vacant possession of the suit premises, along with arrears of rent amounting to Rs. 5,48,903/- from November 2018 till September 2021. Additionally, a decree for Rs. 14,40,000/- and mesne profit at Rs. 300/- per sq. ft. per month from October 1, 2021, until the handover of vacant possession, was sought. The Court allowed the application for a final judgment and decree, subject to conditions [Paras 1-33].

Notice of Termination – Validity – The notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, addressed only to defendant no.1, was contested for not being served to the firm or defendant no.2. The Court held that the notice to a partner (defendant no.1) operates as notice to the firm under Section 24 of the Partnership Act, 1932. The objections to the notice were deemed waived due to no immediate objection from the defendants upon receipt [Paras 27-33].

Procedural Issues in Suits by and Against Firms – The Court discussed the procedural requirements under Order XXX of the CPC for suing and being sued in the firm’s name. The suit filed against defendant no.1 individually, despite the firm being a partnership, was upheld due to the specific circumstances and prior knowledge of the plaintiff [Paras 30-31].

Conditions for Leave to Defend – The Court outlined the conditions under which the defendants could proceed with the suit, emphasizing the requirement to secure Rs. 11,00,000/- with the Registrar within four weeks. Failure to comply would result in eviction [Paras 32-33].

Decision:

Application (G.A. No. 1 of 2023) disposed of. Defendants permitted to proceed with the suit subject to securing the specified amount within the stipulated period, failing which they must vacate the premises.

Criminal Procedure – Framing of Charges – Revision Petition – Petitioners challenged the order of the 5^th Special Court at Calcutta framing charges under multiple sections of the Companies Act and SEBI Act, arguing that the charges were beyond the scope of the initial complaint and framed without proper judicial consideration – High Court observed that the trial court included sections not mentioned in the complaint and failed to provide a clear and precise charge to the accused – Held, the trial court’s order and formal charge set aside – Directed trial court to reconsider and frame charges afresh within 15 days, ensuring compliance with legal requirements and principles of natural justice [Paras 1-34].

Judicial Application – Scope of Complaint – High Court emphasized that charges must be based strictly on the scope of the complaint and evidence on record – Trial courts must apply judicial mind and provide clear, unambiguous charges to the accused – Emphasized importance of fair trial and proper notice of accusations [Paras 19-26].

Decision: Revision allowed – Order dated 17.01.2020 and formal charges framed by the 5^th Special Court at Calcutta set aside – Trial court directed to reconsider and frame charges afresh within 15 days [Paras 28-34].

Advance Ruling – Eligibility of Recipient – Petition challenging AAR order rejecting application for advance ruling on transportation exemption – AAR held that petitioner, as recipient and not supplier, could not seek advance ruling – Court found this interpretation erroneous – Sections 95, 97 allow registered persons, including those liable on reverse charge basis, to seek rulings – Definition and context of ‘applicant’ and ‘advance ruling’ under CGST Act support inclusivity – AAR directed to reconsider application [Paras 1-20].

Reverse Charge Mechanism – Scope and Application – Section 9(3) CGST Act – Government notification mandates tax payment on reverse charge basis by recipients in specified categories – Court emphasizes recipient treated as supplier for tax purposes – Application for advance ruling valid for recipients in reverse charge scenarios – Order under Section 98(2) CGST Act appealable if procedural requirements unmet [Paras 10-17].

Alternative Remedy – Appeal Process – Section 100 CGST Act – Appeal limited to orders under Section 98(4), not rejections under Section 98(2) – Court clarifies jurisdiction for writ petition due to lack of alternative remedy against preliminary rejection [Paras 18-19].

Decision – Writ Petition Allowed – Impugned AAR order set aside – Matter remanded to AAR for fresh decision under Section 98(4) CGST Act in light of statutory interpretations and context [Paras 19-20].
 

Matrimonial Law – Permanent Alimony – Appeal and Modification – The Family Court dissolved the marriage between the appellant and the respondent, directing the appellant to pay ₹14,00,000/- as permanent alimony. On appeal (MATA No. 64 of 2018), the High Court reduced the alimony to ₹10,00,000/-, with a direction for payment within four months. Failing timely payment, the amount was to carry 6% interest from the date of filing the appeal. The appellant’s special leave petition to the Supreme Court was dismissed. Payment was made post-dismissal. The court held that pursuing legal remedies in the Supreme Court does not constitute willful default, acknowledging immediate compliance post-dismissal [Paras 1-9].

Execution and Satisfaction of Order – The High Court recorded the execution, discharge, and satisfaction of its order dated 9th February 2023, noting the appellant’s bona fide in pursuing the special leave petition and immediate payment post-dismissal. Directed the Executing Court to dispose of Civil Execution Case No. 11 of 2018 accordingly [Para 8-9].

Decision: Appeal disposed of. Execution and satisfaction of order recorded. Directions issued for disposal of Civil Execution Case No. 11 of 2018.
 

Criminal Law – Conviction Reversed: Appeal challenges the conviction and sentence imposed by the Sessions Court based on conflicting dying declarations of the deceased. High Court observed material contradictions between the two declarations, leading to acquittal due to lack of reliable and consistent evidence [Paras 14-25].

Dying Declarations – Inconsistencies: Two dying declarations recorded; the first before the police (Ex.P/6) and the second before the Magistrate (Ex.D/10). Significant discrepancies between these declarations regarding identities of the assailants and incident circumstances undermined the reliability of the prosecution’s case [Paras 15-18].

Witness Testimony – Reliability: Sole eyewitness, Naseeb Kaur (PW.3), provided statements containing contradictions deemed unreliable. Court stressed need for independent corroborative evidence to support conviction, which was absent [Paras 19-20].

Judicial Precedents on Dying Declarations: Court cited several precedents emphasizing need for consistency in multiple dying declarations and preference for declarations recorded by a Magistrate over those by police officers, especially when material contradictions are present [Paras 18.1-18.3].

Decision: Appeal allowed, conviction and sentence passed by Sessions Judge quashed. Appellant acquitted of charges under Sections 302/34 and 447 IPC. Bail bonds discharged [Paras 24-25].
 

Banking Law – Classification of NPA – SBI classified Atibir Industries’ account as NPA on October 16, 2020, based on defaults in cash credit and term loan facilities. Borrower challenged this classification and subsequent sale to ARC, citing RBI guidelines and moratoriums during COVID-19. Court upheld SBI’s classification, stating cash credit account was irregular, and all credit facilities became NPA [Paras 55-67].

Transfer of Loan Exposures – Compliance with RBI Directions – SBI’s sale of financial assets to ARC on February 10, 2023, under Section 5 of SARFAESI Act was challenged by the borrower. Court confirmed compliance with RBI’s Master Direction and upheld the transfer, noting borrower’s accounts were classified as SMA or NPA as required [Paras 74-77].

Procedural Obligations under Section 13 of SARFAESI Act – Borrower’s failure to respond to notice under Section 13(2) raised a rebuttable presumption of acceptance of default. Court emphasized the borrower’s burden to prove incorrect classification, which was not discharged [Paras 91-92].

Decision: Appeals allowed – Borrower’s writ petition dismissed – Classification as NPA and subsequent sale of financial assets by SBI to ARC upheld – Court found no violation of RBI guidelines or statutory provisions.
 

Land Assignment and Patta Validity – Irregularities and Fraudulent Transactions – Petitioners challenged the cancellation of their thandaper accounts by the Tahsildar, contending they purchased the land from legitimate pattadars after due diligence – High Court upheld the cancellation, citing procedural irregularities and fraudulent actions in the issuance of the original patta – Petitioners directed to seek redressal against the vendors if aggrieved [Paras 1-10].

Administrative Law – Procedural Validity and Natural Justice – Tahsildar’s decision to cancel thandaper accounts challenged for alleged extraneous considerations – High Court found no procedural faults or violations of natural justice principles – Independent findings of Tahsildar after examining relevant records justified [Paras 9-12].

Further Investigation Directed – Special Investigation Team – Given the manipulations involved, the court directed a detailed enquiry by the Special Investigation Team constituted as per previous court directions – Appropriate action to be taken against officials and others involved in fraudulent transactions [Paras 10-14].

Decision: Writ petitions dismissed – Thandaper cancellations upheld – Further probe and action ordered by the Special Investigation Team.
 

Criminal Law – Murder – Convictions upheld for appellants under Sections 143, 147, 148, 120B, and 302 r/w Section 149 of the IPC – Involvement in conspiracy and unlawful assembly proven – Evidence from eyewitnesses deemed credible despite minor inconsistencies – Injuries sustained by deceased correlated with witness testimony and forensic reports – Appeals dismissed, confirming convictions and sentences – Court highlighted importance of corroborative evidence and upheld procedural propriety of trial court [Paras 1-57].

Evidence – Witness Credibility – Eyewitness testimonies deemed reliable despite minor discrepancies – Court noted that minor variations in accounts do not undermine overall credibility – Presence of street lights confirmed witness capability to observe incident – Discrepancies in minor details found not to impact core facts of the case [Paras 33-38].

Injuries and Forensic Evidence – Autopsy confirmed multiple fatal injuries – Correlation between weapon marks and injuries established – Presence of human blood on weapons and clothes confirmed involvement of appellants – Procedural lapses in forensic analysis noted but deemed non-fatal to prosecution’s case [Paras 19-20].

Conspiracy and Unlawful Assembly – Conspiracy inferred from the sequence of events and coordinated actions of appellants – Formation of unlawful assembly with common intent to murder established – Non-examination of peripheral witnesses not fatal to prosecution’s case – Court emphasized the contextual understanding of common object under Section 149 IPC [Paras 39-46].

Decision – Appeals Dismissed – Convictions and sentences of appellants affirmed – Procedural and evidentiary aspects upheld by High Court [Para 49].
 

Human Trafficking and Rape – Conviction of Accused –
The appellants, Jafar Ali and Shameer @ Saji, were convicted for human trafficking and rape of a minor. The victim, a 15-year-old girl from Bangladesh, was transported under false promises and sold for sexual exploitation. The High Court upheld the trial court’s judgment, emphasizing the reliability of the victim’s testimony and the corroborative evidence provided by other witnesses and documents. The appellants were sentenced to rigorous imprisonment and fined, with directions for compensation to the victim.

Witness Testimony – Reliability and Corroboration –
The victim’s testimony was found to be consistent and reliable. Despite minor omissions, her evidence was corroborated by other prosecution witnesses and documentary evidence. The court noted that the victim’s initial statements were given under duress and mental stress, which justified the minor discrepancies. The reliability of the testimony was further supported by the consistent identification of the accused and the circumstances surrounding the crime.

Evidentiary Issues – Discovery and Procedural Aspects –
The court addressed procedural issues, including the proper recording of the victim’s statement and the admissibility of evidence. The court criticized the investigation for failing to collect certain evidence, such as CCTV footage, but held that the prosecution’s case was still strong enough to support the conviction. The testimony of the investigating officer and the consistency of the victim’s statements played a crucial role in the court’s decision.

Decision – Appeals Dismissed –
The High Court dismissed the appeals, affirming the convictions and sentences of the appellants. The court granted liberty to the appellants to seek remission of their sentences from the state government, considering mitigating factors and the time already served. The decision underscored the importance of addressing crimes against women and children with the utmost seriousness and sensitivity.