The Calcutta High Court, upon petitioners’ request, dismissed the writ petition as withdrawn, recording the withdrawal without entering on the merits. This order does not create, overrule, clarify, or interpret any legal precedent, and cannot be cited as binding or persuasive authority in future cases involving the same or related issues.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | WPA/8767/2019 of M/S M. L. CHOPRA SHIPPING PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS Vs RESERVE BANK OF INDIA & ORS |
| CNR | WBCHCA0199752019 |
| Date of Registration | 22-04-2019 |
| Decision Date | 10-09-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN |
| Judgment Author | HON’BLE JUSTICE PARTHA SARATHI CHATTERJEE |
| Court | Calcutta High Court |
| Bench | Single Bench (Justice Partha Sarathi Chatterjee) |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | Not binding on any court; no precedential value created |
| Persuasive For | Not a precedent; cannot be relied on as persuasive authority |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- The court recorded the petitioners’ wish not to proceed with the writ petition.
- The writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn without any adjudication on merits.
- Such orders do not create or clarify legal precedent and hold no authoritative value for future litigation.
- Lawyers should note that withdrawal does not result in a decision on the legal questions raised.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The learned Advocate for the petitioners communicated the desire to withdraw the writ petition.
- An email communication from petitioner no. 3 confirming withdrawal was placed on record.
- Based on this express submission, the court dismissed WPA 8767/2019 as withdrawn.
- The court did not enter into the merits of the case or any legal issue.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner
- The petitioners do not want to proceed with the instant writ petition and sought permission for withdrawal.
- A supporting communication from petitioner no. 3 was submitted.
No submissions or arguments from the Respondents are recorded in the order.
Factual Background
- The writ petition was filed before the Calcutta High Court.
- No background facts or nature of dispute are set out or summarized in the dismissal order.
- The only development recorded is the petitioners’ decision to withdraw the petition.
Statutory Analysis
- No statutory provisions were analyzed or interpreted in the disposal order.
Procedural Innovations
- The court took on record an email from petitioner no. 3 as evidence of the petitioners’ wish to withdraw, reflecting acceptance of remote/online communication as proof of intention.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – The court followed established practice in permitting withdrawal and recording dismissal as withdrawn, without entering on merits or creating precedent.