State of W.B. Vs Shiladitya Banerjee — Calcutta HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

State of W.B. Vs Shiladitya Banerjee — Calcutta HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Department directed to accept the vakalatnama of Mr. Subhojit Roy (Partner, M/s. Victor Moses & Co.) and disburse to him, on behalf of applicant Smt. Aditi Mukherjee, the amount lying to the credit of FA 195 of 2004; payment instrument to be released in favour of Mr. Roy within one week from communication of the order, on the basis of the letter of authority.

Issue for consideration

Whether the department should accept the vakalatnama of Mr. Subhojit Roy and disburse to him, on behalf of the applicant Smt. Aditi Mukherjee, her 1/3rd share of the compensation amount lying to the credit of FA 195 of 2004.

Court's answer

The court presumed that the learned Registrar General had not released the amount because there was no specific direction to release the payment in favour of the representatives of the beneficiary, Aditi Mukherjee.

Ratio / Principle

In view of the averments in the petition, the communications dated 11th July, 2025 and the Joint Registrar's note dated 10th July, 2025, the court directed the department to accept the vakalatnama on behalf of Sri Subhojit Roy and disburse the said amount to him, he to receive it on behalf of the applicant.

Key takeaways

The department was directed to act on the basis of the letter of authority and release the payment instrument in favour of Mr. Roy, partner of M/s. Victor Moses & Co., within one week from communication of the order, and to communicate the order immediately to the learned Registrar General.ratio¶11
CAN 10 of 2025 was accordingly disposed of.ratio¶15

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Disbursement of compensation — applicant Smt. Aditi Mukherjee, beneficiary of a 1/3rd share of compensation directed to be released by order dated 24.06.2025, sought release of her share lying to the credit of appeal FA 195 of 2004 — payment withheld for want of a specific direction in favour of her representative — court accepted the averments, the communications dated 11.07.2025 and the Joint Registrar (General Administration-II) note dated 10.07.2025, and directed the department to accept the vakalatnama of Mr. Subhojit Roy (Partner, M/s. Victor Moses & Co.) and release the payment instrument in his favour within one week of communication of the order — CAN 10 of 2025 disposed of (Soumen Sen and Smita Das De, JJ., 15-07-2025).

ItemsFA 195 of 2004 15-07-2025 7&8. CAN 10 of 2025 State of West Bengal sg Vs. Shiladitya Banerjee & Ors.

Ct. 8

With COT 1045 of 2005 State of West Bengal Vs. Shiladitya Banerjee & Ors.

Mr. Pranit Bag Mr. Aurin Chakraborty Ms. Swastika Sengupta …for the petitioner Mr. Sabyasachi Sen …for the respondent nos.1&2

The applicant is the beneficiary of 1/3^rd share in the compensation amount directed to be released in her father by an order dated 24^th June, 2025.

It appears that initially she was represented by one Ms. Arundhati Chatterjee, Advocate. However, as she was not traceable, a fresh vakalatnama was executed in favour of Annek Pandit, Advocate nominated by M/s. Victor Moses & Co. in 2022 and later on 8^th July, 2025 in favour of Mr. Subhojit Roy, Partner of M/s. Victor Moses & Co. After the order was passed, a communication was made by Smt. Aditi Mukherjee on 11^th July, 2025 to the learned Registered General for release of her share and for that purpose she nominated Mr. Subhojit Roy, Advocate, to receive the money equivalent to 1/3^rd portion of the total

2

amount lying to the credit of the appeal being FA 195 of 2004. Subsequently, Mr. Subhojit Roy has also made a request to learned Registrar General on 11^th July, 2025 for disbursement of the said amount in favour of her client. It is submitted that in spite of such communication, payment has not been received from the learned Registrar General.

We presume that since there is no specific direction to release the payment in favour of representatives of the beneficiary namely, Aditi Mukherjee, the learned Registrar General has not released the said amount.

In view of the averments made in the petition and the communications from Smt. Aditi Mukherjee to the learned Advocate General and from Subhojit Roy to the learned Registrar General both dated 11^th July, 2025 and having considered the note prepared by the Joint Registrar (General Administration-II) dated 10^th July, 2025, we direct the department to accept the vakalatnama on behalf of Sri Subhojit Roy and disburse the said amount to Mr. Subhojit Roy who shall receive the said amount on behalf of the applicant.

The department shall act on the basis of the letter of authority and release the payment instrument in favour of Mr. Roy, partner of M/s. Victor Moses & Co. within one week from the date of communication of this order.

This order shall be immediately communicated to the

3

learned Registrar General for information and doing the needful.

CAN 10 of 2025 is accordingly, disposed of.

(Soumen Sen, J.)

(Smita Das De, J.)