SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Cal) 391

CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
SIDDHARTA CHANDRA – Appellant
Versus
SK. ABUL KASEM AND ORS. – Respondent


In the High Court at Calcutta

Civil Appellate Jurisdiction

Appellate Side

The Hon’ble Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya

And

The Hon’ble Justice Supratim Bhattacharya

FMA 1738 of 2025

with

CAN 1 of 2025

SIDDHARTA CHANDRA

VS.

SK. ABUL KASEM & ORS

For the appellant : Mr. Sukumar Bhattacharyya

Ms. Oindrilla Chatterjee

Ms. Puja Sonkar

Ms. Subhangi Bhattacharyya

For the respondent : Mr. Anindya Halder

Mr. Sk. Zubair Ahmed

Mr. Rasidul Islam Molla

Heard on : 13.01.2026 Judgment on : 13.01.2026

Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J.:-

1. In view of arguable questions of fact and law being involved, FMA

1738 of 2025 is admitted to be heard on the grounds taken in the

memorandum of appeal.

2. It is argued by learned counsel for the appellant that the Civil Court

which passed the impugned order under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 did not have jurisdiction, since the dispute

between the parties, as per the averments made in the Section 9 application itself, comes within the ambit of “commercial dispute” as envisaged in the Commercial Courts Act, 2015.

3. It is further contended that to the knowledge of the appellant, no steps have been taken by the petitioner/respondent no.1 for reference to arbitration d

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top