Calcutta High Court
C And E Limited And Ors vs Feather Touch Limited And Ors on 13 August, 2025
Author: Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya
Bench: Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya
OD-9 & 10
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
ORIGINAL SIDE
APO/184/2023
IN
AP/402/2020
IA NO: GA/2/2023
C AND E LIMITED AND ORS
VS
FEATHER TOUCH LIMITED AND ORS
AND
APO/185/2023
IN
AP/364/2020
IA NO: GA/2/2023
C AND E LTD (COMPONENTS AND EQUIPMENTS LTD AND ORS)
VS
GOPAL DAS BAGRI AND ORS.
BEFORE:
THE HON'BLE JUSTICE SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA
AND
THE HON'BLE JUSTICE UDAY KUMAR
Date: 13th August, 2025.
APPEARANCE:
Mr. S. N. Mookherjee, Sr. Adv.
Mr.Dhruba Ghosh, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Rajarshi Dutta, Adv.
Mr. V.V.V Sastry, Adv.
Mr. Rahul Poddar, Adv.
Mr. YashSinghi, Adv.
...for the appellants.
Mr. Dhruv Dewan, Adv.
Mr. Sandip Agarwal, Adv.
Mr. Abhishek Swaroop, Adv.
Mrs. Sulagna Mukherjee, Adv.
Mr. Tanay Agarwal, Adv.
...for the respondents.
The Court: At the outset, we made it clear to learned counsel for both
sides that due to the learned Arbitrator, against whom allegations of
fraudand bias were made in connection with the challenge under Section 34
of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996,having been an eminent
counsel of this Court and known to us as counsel, although we did not have
any personal kinship with the Arbitrator, the parties should express as to
whether they have any objection to this Bench taking up the matter.
Such query was put by us particularly in view of the nature of
allegations made personally against the learned Arbitrator.
At this, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellants made it
clear that the appellants do not have any objection in that regard. However,
learned counsel appearing for the respondents, upon taking instructions
from his client, submitted that the respondents have some reservations if
this Bench takes up the matter. On query of Court, learned counsel
appearing for the respondents further clarifies that such apprehension in
the mind of the respondents raises out of the fact of the learned Arbitrator
commands respect from the judges of this Court and the counsel in general
in view of his standing at the Bar at the relevant point of time.
Learned senior counsel appearing for the appellants hands over a
copy of a judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Transfer
Petition (Civil) Nos. 1173-1174 of 2021, along with Transfer Petition (Civil)
Nos. 1203-1204 of 2021 and Transfer Petition (Civil) Nos. 282-283 of 2021.
It is submitted that on a previous occasion,the transfer applicationswere
made by the present respondents on a similar ground, that the learned
Arbitrator and his family commands respect amongst the members of the
Bar and the Bench of the Hon'ble High Court at Calcutta and as such, the
Court may be swayed in passing its judgment.
However, the Hon'ble Supreme Court had turned down the prayer for
transfer on the grounds as mentioned in its order dated September 24,
2021.
Upon careful consideration of the submissions of parties on the
question of objection, we would like to mention at the outset that we, that is,
the members of this Bench, do not have any iota of doubt that we would not
be influenced or biased/"swayed" in any manner merely due to the standing
or the eminence of the learned Arbitrator as a senior counsel of this Court.
However, the option was given to the parties in order to obviate any
further complications or any apprehension that the Court did not give any
opportunity to the parties to take such objection at the outset.
We want to quote certain portions of the order of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in dismissing the transfer petitions indicated above:-
"Thus, what petitioners are trying to suggest is that as
the learned Arbitrator is an eminent figure in the legal fraternity
in Calcutta, they will not get justice from any of the Judges of
the Calcutta High Court who are admittedly more than 30. Even
assuming that five Hon'ble Judges have recused
themselves,that is no ground to express an apprehension about
the entire High Court of Calcutta consisting of more than 30
Judges by contending that the petitioners will not get justice
from the Calcutta High Court.
Even assuming that the learned Arbitrator is a very
respected member of the Bar, I am sure that the High Court of
Calcutta will examine the allegations of misconduct without
being influenced by the alleged status of the learned Arbitrator.
Suffice it to say that no ground is made out to transfer the
subject petition pending in Calcutta HighCourt to any other
High Court. Hence, these petitions are dismissed."
Learned senior counsel appearing for the appellants also submits that
a similar point was taken before the learned Single Judge who passed the
impugned order under Section 34 of the 1996 Act. The said application
seeking recusal of the learned Single Judge was also dismissed. While doing
so, the learned Single Judge observed, inter alia,that there was no hesitation
or doubt in the mind of the Court that the application was in bad taste and
on inappropriate legal advice. It was also observed that the facts of the case
and the conduct of the applicant warrant imposition of appropriate costs
and a token cost of Rs.11/- was imposed on the applicant therein, that is,
the present respondents.
We, with utmost respect, agree with the logic of the order of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in refusing the transfer applications previously filed
by the respondents.
Merely by dint of the respect which the learned Arbitrator commanded
as a senior counsel of this Court, it cannot be assumed that the judges of
this Court will be biased and shall mete out an order to cater to such
respect, thereby giving a complete go-bye to the Constitutional oath taken
by them. The moment a judge sits on his chair, given to him by the people of
the country through the Constitution, he or she is expected to be beyond
personal prejudices as well as influence, in any manner whatsoever.
We ourselves are confident that, sitting on the Judge's chair, we shall
not consciously do any injustice by being unnecessarily swayed merely by
the influence enjoyed by the learned Arbitrator on the members of the Bar
and respect enjoyed by him as counsel while deciding specific allegations
made against him in the capacity of an Arbitrator.
As such, merely because we are judges of this Court and were
acquainted with the learned Arbitrator in his capacity as a senior counsel of
this Court, we are confident that we would not, in any manner, be swayed
by any consideration, extraneous or otherwise, apart from an objective
consideration of the papers before us and the matters which fall for
consideration in fact and law.
Having expressed such confidence in our capacity as judges of a
Constitutional Court, we accordingly turn down the objection taken by the
respondents in us taking up the matter.
Accordingly, the hearing of the matter on merits is commenced.
Heard in part.
For further hearing, list the matters on August 20, 2025 at 10:30 A.M.
(SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA, J.)
(UDAY KUMAR, J.)
KB
AR (CR)
