The Calcutta High Court reaffirms that appeals may be dismissed as infructuous where no live controversy survives. This judgment upholds existing precedent, confirming that courts have the authority to decline adjudication when the matter is rendered academic, with binding value for similar situations across subordinate courts in West Bengal.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | MAT/1242/2023 of SONJAY CHAKRABORTY Vs MILAN GOUR AND ORS |
| CNR | WBCHCA0320342023 |
| Date of Registration | 04-07-2023 |
| Decision Date | 29-10-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS |
| Judgment Author | HON’BLE JUSTICE LANUSUNGKUM JAMIR, HON’BLE JUSTICE RAI CHATTOPADHYAY |
| Court | Calcutta High Court |
| Bench | HON’BLE JUSTICE LANUSUNGKUM JAMIR, HON’BLE JUSTICE RAI CHATTOPADHYAY |
| Precedent Value | Binding within the Calcutta High Court and subordinate courts; persuasive elsewhere |
| Type of Law | Civil Procedure/Appellate Practice |
| Ratio Decidendi |
The appeal was dismissed as infructuous upon submission by counsel for the appellant, on the ground that the matter no longer involved any live controversy requiring adjudication by the court. The court acknowledged the lack of necessity to proceed when events have rendered the dispute academic. This reaffirms the principle that courts may decline to proceed when no effective relief can be granted. |
| Facts as Summarised by the Court | Learned counsel for the appellant submitted before the court that the matter had become infructuous. The court, upon consideration of this submission, dismissed the appeal as infructuous. |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All subordinate courts within the jurisdiction of the Calcutta High Court |
| Persuasive For | Other High Courts and the Supreme Court in deciding similar procedural situations |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- Reaffirms the principle that appeals or legal proceedings may be dismissed as infructuous when no live dispute remains.
- Confirms that upon such submission by counsel, the court may summarily dispose of the matter without delving into merits.
- Lawyers should be prepared to demonstrate loss of live issues if seeking dismissal on grounds of infructuousness.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The court acted upon the submission of counsel for the appellant that the matter was now infructuous.
- Based on this submission, the court determined there was no longer any live controversy or effective relief that could be granted through adjudication.
- Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed as infructuous without proceeding to consider the merits.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner (Appellant):
- Counsel for the appellant submitted that the matter had become infructuous.
Respondent:
- No submissions recorded in the judgment.
Factual Background
Learned counsel for the appellant, in the pending civil appellate matter before the Calcutta High Court, submitted that the case had become infructuous. The court considered this submission and dismissed the appeal as infructuous accordingly.
Statutory Analysis
No statutory provisions beyond general principles of civil appellate procedure were discussed or interpreted in the judgment.
Dissenting / Concurring Opinion Summary
No dissenting or separate concurring opinion is recorded in the judgment. Both judges concurred in the order.
Procedural Innovations
No procedural innovations or new guidelines were introduced in this judgment.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – Affirmation of existing procedural doctrine regarding infructuous matters.