##PAGE1##

OD – 3

ODER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction

ORIGINAL SIDE

CS/19/2020

IA NO: GA/1/2020(Old No: GA/992/2020),

GA/5/2021, GA/6/2021, GA/7/2023

BENGAL BONDED WAREHOUSE LIMITED

VS

THE CALCUTTA SAFE DEPOSIT COMPANY

LIMITED

BEFORE:

The Hon’ble JUSTICE SUGATO MAJUMDAR

Date: 23^rd December, 2025

Appearance:

Mr. Abhrajit Mitra, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Satadeep Bhattacharya, Adv.

Ms. Pritha Basu, Adv.

Mr. Debartha Chakraborty, Adv.

Ms. Bhawna Parasramka, Adv.

...for the Plaintiff

Mr. K. R. Thaker, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Amritam Mandal, Adv.

Mr. Rohit Banerjee, Adv.

Mr. Anurag Bagaria, Adv.

Mr. D. Sonthalia, Adv.

…for the Defendant

The Court: GA 7 of 2023 is an application filed by the Defendant, praying for

rejection of plaint/dismissal of suit, along with other reliefs.

It is pleaded in the application that the plaint is for decree for recovery of khas

possession. The subject matter of the suit involves a commercial dispute as defined

in the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. The suit has not been filed in the Commercial

2

Division but in the Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction; therefore, the suit should be

dismissed and/or the plaint be rejected.

Affidavit-in-opposition refuted all the allegations and contentions. Among the

others, it is pleaded in the affidavit-in-opposition that the Plaintiff’s cause of action

for recovery of possession of the suit property arose on expiry of lease by efflux of

time in terms of Section 111 (a) of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. Alternative

case made up by the Plaintiff is that the relationship between the parties were

governed by the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997, for which the Plaintiff is

entitled to a decree of eviction against the Defendant under Section 6 of the West

Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997. It is strongly objected to that the dispute is a

commercial dispute. According to the Plaintiff, the Ordinary Original Civil

Jurisdiction of this Court has jurisdiction to entertain the suit, as pleaded.

Affidavit-in-reply was filed.

Mr. Thaker, the Learned Senior Counsel for the Defendant argued that the

Plaintiff has relied upon the agreement relating to immovable property being lease

dated 16/06/1937. In paragraph 12 of the plaint, the Plaintiff has alleged that the

said premises was let out for running safe deposit business. It has also been alleged

that the Defendant has inducted several companies as tenant in the demise premises.

Referring to Section 2 (1) (c) (vii) of the Commercial Courts Act. It was argued that

the dispute is a commercial one and the plaint should be rejected.

The next point of argument was that the plaint contains mutually destructive

pleas. The suit has been instituted under Section 6 of the West Bengal Premises

Tenancy Act, 1997; notice of eviction was under the same section. Obviously, the

statutory body constituted under the Act of 1997 has only jurisdiction to the

exclusion of this Court. In that sense the suit is barred by law.

3

Mr. Thaker, the Learned Senior Counsel also challenged the suit on the Court

of overvaluation, referring to Section 7 of the Court Fees Act. Mr. Thaker relied upon

the observation and ration of the Supreme Court of India in Devasahayam Vs. P.

Savithramma [(2005) 7 SCC 653].

Mr. Thaker also relied upon the decisions in T. E. Thomson & Company

Limited Vs. Swarnalata Chopra Nee Kapur & Anr. [2024 SCC OnLine Cal

8985], Devasahayam Vs. P. Savithramma [(2005) 7 SCC 653] and

Shrimoni Gurdwara Committee Vs. Jaswant Singh [(1996) 11 SCC 690].

Mr. Mitra, the Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Plaintiff, referring to

Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprises Ltd. Vs. K. S. Infraspace LLP & Anr.

[(2020) 15 SCC 585] argued that the suit premises was to be actually used for

commercial purpose to come within ambit of Section 2 (1) (c) (vii) of the Commercial

Courts Act. It is not the case of the Plaintiff that the suit premises was used

exclusively for trade and commerce. It is the specific case that the lease deed dated

16^th June, 1937 was in respect of piece and parcel of l