An appellate court reiterated that appeals rendered infructuous by changed circumstances or parties’ admissions should be dismissed accordingly. This order affirms settled procedure on handling infructuous appeals, without altering substantive law or existing precedents. The judgment is of practical, procedural value for pending and future appellate matters but does not create new binding legal principles for substantive rights.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | MAT/1702/2022 of AKHTER ALI Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. |
| CNR | WBCHCA0464242022 |
| Date of Registration | 30-09-2022 |
| Decision Date | 29-10-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS |
| Judgment Author | Lanusungkum Jamir, J.; Rai Chattopadhyay, J. |
| Court | Calcutta High Court |
| Bench | Lanusungkum Jamir, J. and Rai Chattopadhyay, J. |
| Precedent Value | Binding for procedural aspect of handling infructuous appeals; not for merits |
| Type of Law | Procedural – Appellate Practice |
| Questions of Law | Proper course when an appeal becomes infructuous during pendency |
| Ratio Decidendi |
Where the appellant admits that the appeal has become infructuous, the proper judicial course is to dismiss the appeal as infructuous. The court is not required to adjudicate on the merits of the appeal if it no longer presents a live controversy. This approach saves judicial time and maintains procedural economy. No ruling is made on the substantive legal issues raised in the appeal. |
| Facts as Summarised by the Court | The appellant’s counsel submitted before the Court that the appeal has become infructuous. The Court dismissed the appeal accordingly. |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All subordinate courts within the jurisdiction of the Calcutta High Court for procedure. |
| Persuasive For | Other High Courts on procedural dismissal of infructuous appeals. |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- Reiterates that Courts may dismiss appeals as infructuous upon express submission by appellant’s counsel.
- No decision on the merits of the appeal follows from such dismissal.
- Such orders clarify that no substantive rights or questions are determined where an appeal is dismissed as infructuous.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The Court noted the express submission by the appellant’s counsel that the matter has become infructuous.
- Upon such submission, the Court found no reason to proceed with the appeal on merits.
- The appeal was dismissed as infructuous by a speaking order.
- No analysis was undertaken of the underlying facts or substantive legal issues, given the acknowledgment of infructuousness.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner (Appellant):
- Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the matter has become infructuous.
Respondent:
No submissions recorded in the judgment.
Factual Background
The appellant, represented by counsel, approached the Calcutta High Court with an appeal. During the hearing, counsel for the appellant informed the Court that the matter had become infructuous. Based on this statement, the Court proceeded to dismiss the appeal as infructuous. No further background or detail of the underlying dispute or sections involved is mentioned in the judgment.
Statutory Analysis
The judgment does not recite or analyze any statutory provisions. The dismissal as infructuous was based entirely on the procedural submission of the appellant’s counsel, with no reference to statutes.
Procedural Innovations
No procedural innovations are introduced in the judgment. The court followed existing procedural practice for dismissal of infructuous appeals.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – Dismissal of appeals as infructuous on party admission is consistent with existing judicial procedure.