Articles/Blogs Online Consultation

Online Lawyer Consultation

Online Lawyer Consultation Kolkata

Onilne lawyer consultation kolkata or online lawyer consultation in kolkata as you may call it , there are various  possibilities for online legal advice. Here are several possibilities:  is an online active  service that links clients seeking legal  assistance and advice with Kolkata-based  lawyers  providing a  variety of legal services, including those related to corporation law, family law, and property law.  is a team of skilled lawyers proficient in family laws or matrimonial laws as is otherwise known completely focused   on various legal areas  and provide clients with one on one legal counsel.

      Best Law firm in Kolkata

Best  law firm  can be adjudged only on the basis on how a law firm maintains confidentiality and provides accurate information to clients on the proceedings  and one of the ways is engaging Taps9 Law Chamber is a one such law firm that will give you all that you need with 100 percent accuracy .

        Top 10 lawyers in Kolkata

Advocate Tapan Choudhury is one such lawyer who will give you a person assistance on every aspect of your case. He believes in giving his best for his clients and therefore if one has to choose  one amongst the best lawyers in kolkata , it should be Advocate Tapan Choudhury without a doubt.

Divorce Lawyer in Kolkata near me

All you need to do is log on to and you will find your divorce lawyer near you , just a click away.  One you consult you will know you have come to the right place . Its also important to note that a lawyer maintains confidentiality and works wholeheartedly for his client. Online Lawyer Consultation Kolkata is the best way to choose a lawyer near you and is definitely one law portals for lawyers that would find mention on top of google search engine


Online top divorce lawyers in kolkata

You will find your choice of lawyers at . you are just a click away from choosing your destiny.


Articles/Blogs Trade Mark



To believe that just  mere registration of a trade mark   would  mean a trade mark is common to trade is not a correct understanding and therefore it is important to deal with the subject of trade mark infringers who would not create any harm by use of a simiar trade mark. .  Insignificant infringers of trade marks The Division Bench of this the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi  in Pankaj Goel v. Dabur India Ltd. has been clear on this point which reads as under:

―21. As far as the Appellant’s argument that the word MOLA is common to the trade and that variants of MOLA are available in the market, we find that the Appellant has not been able to prima facie prove that the said ‘infringers’ had significant business turnover or they posed a threat to Plaintiff’s distinctiveness. In fact, we are of the view that the Respondent/Plaintiff is not expected to sue all small type infringers who may not be affecting Respondent/Plaintiff business. The Supreme Court in National Bell v. Metal Goods , has held that a proprietor of a trademark need not take action against infringement which do not cause prejudice to its distinctiveness. In Express Bottlers Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Pepsi Inc. , it has been held as under:—

… To establish the plea of common use, the use by other persons should be shown to be substantial. In the present case, there is no evidence regarding the extent of the trade carried on by the alleged infringers or their respective position in the trade. If the proprietor of the mark is expected to pursue each and every insignificant infringer to save his mark, the business will come to a standstill. Because there may be occasion when the malicious persons, just to harass the proprietor may use his mark by way of pinpricks…. The mere use of the name is irrelevant because a registered proprietor is not expected to go on filing suits or proceedings against infringers who are of no consequence… Mere delay in taking action against the infringers is not sufficient to hold that the registered proprietor has lost the mark intentionally unless it is positively proved that delay was due to intentional abandonment of the right over the registered mark. This Court is inclined to accept the submissions of the respondent No. 1 on this point… The respondent No. 1 did not lose its mark by not proceeding against insignificant infringers…

In fact, in Dr. Reddy Laboratories v. Reddy Paharmaceuticals,  a Single Judge of  the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi  has held as under:—

…the owners of trade marks or copy rights are not expected to run after every infringer and thereby remain involved in litigation at the cost of their business time. If the impugned infringement is too trivial or insignificant and is not capable of harming their business interests, they may overlook and ignore petty violations till they assume alarming proportions. If a road side Dhaba puts up a board of ―Taj Hotel‖, the owners of Taj Group are not expected to swing into action and raise objections forthwith. They can wait till the time the user of their name starts harming their business interest and starts misleading and confusing their customers.

The Division Bench of the Hon’ble High  Court of Delhi  in Sun Pharmaceutical Laboratories Ltd. v. Hetero Healthcare Ltd. , has stated  thus:

―38. In the case of Panacea Biotec Ltd. v. Recon Ltd8 , the plaintiff was using the trademark ‗NIMULID‘ and had filed a suit for injunction against the defendant for using the mark ‗REMULIDE‘ in relation to the same medicine with the API being ‗NIMESULIDE. This Court held that when the name is derived or coined from the name of the principal ingredient being used in the manufacture of the drug, no distinctiveness or exclusiveness can be claimed by the manufacturer. The said decision is applicable to the facts of this case as well; the mark  LETROZ‘ is nothing but a short name of the active ingredient  LETROZOLE‘.

Therefore not in all cases would a trade mark infringement case would be entertained if it is seen that there is no significance of such an infringment  that would in any way harm the Plaintiff in case of suit.

For more information kindly click here




Divorce lawyer fees in kolkata

Divorce lawyer fees in kolkata

Divorce lawyer fees in kolkata  is a tricky question , these factors depend on experience of an an advocate  that apart  there are several factors like  the intricacy of the case, the length of the procedures, the lawyer’s experience, expertise, and reputation.

Whom to choose as a Divorce Lawyer in Kolkata

Divorce lawyer in kolkata 

Advocate Tapan Choudhury  charges no fees for filing matters in kolkata related to divorce.  Furthur charges are dependent on the complexity of the case. In case of Mutual consent divorce the fees is very negligible as there are no issues to be adjudicated upon by the court . The only ground however is temperamental differences. Whether the court will allow a mutual consent divorce or not is completely dependent upon the discretion of the court . The court would first see whether it is a valid marriage and secondly the parties are living separately for more than a year.

Divorce lawyer in kolkata

All you need to do is visit the lawyers office at Kolkata for consultation and once satisfied and you feel that your budget allows you to feel comfortable with the divorce lawyer fees in kolkata you have the choice to moving ahead with your case.  Law Office of Advocate Tapan Choudhury makes your work easy as they maintain 100 percent confidentiality and is focussed on efficiency. You will be informed of every step of the case.

For furthur queries you may get in touch at 

All your queries will be answered by highly experience lawyers at



Sections 164 and 161 Crpc

Section 164  Crpc

Section 164 CrPc deals with the recording of statements and confessions of witnesses or accused persons by a Judicial Magistrate. This section is important in criminal proceedings as it lays down the procedure for recording statements and confessions before a Magistrate.Section 164  and section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) 1973 are important in evidence.

The section provides that any Metropolitan Magistrate or Judicial Magistrate may, whether or not he has jurisdiction in the case, record any statement or confession made to him in the course of an investigation or inquiry under the CrPC or under any other law for the time being in force, relating to any offence.

The Magistrate must ensure that the statement or confession is made voluntarily and without any threat or inducement. He must also explain to the person making the statement or confession that he is not bound to make it and that it may be used as evidence against him.

The statement or confession must be recorded in the language in which it was made, and the Magistrate must sign the record and also the person making the statement or confession may sign it if he wishes to do so.

The recorded statement or confession can be used as evidence in any inquiry or trial in any case, subject to the rules of evidence. However, if the person making the statement or confession retracts it later, the court must consider the reasons for the retraction and other relevant circumstances before deciding whether to rely on it as evidence or not.

In summary, Section 164 CrPC provides for the recording of statements and confessions of witnesses or accused persons before a Magistrate in a manner that ensures their voluntary and truthful nature, and such recordings can be used as evidence in criminal proceedings.

statement  under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (“Cr.P.C”) cannot be used as a substantive piece of evidence and can only be used for the purpose of either contradicting or corroborating the witness. Somasundra @ Somu vs. State (2020) 7 SCC 722 .

On the other hand Section 161 Crpc  deals with the power of the police to examine witnesses during an investigation. The section states that:

Any police officer making an investigation under this chapter, or any police officer not below such rank as the State Government may, by general or special order, prescribe in this behalf, acting on the requisition of such officer, may examine orally any person supposed to be acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case.

Such person shall be bound to answer truly all questions relating to such case put to him by such officer, other than questions the answers to which would have a tendency to expose him to a criminal charge or to a penalty or forfeiture.

The police officer may reduce into writing any statement made to him in the course of an examination under this section, and if he does so, he shall make a separate and true record of the statement of each such person whose statement he records.

In simple terms, this section empowers the police to examine witnesses during an investigation and require them to answer questions truthfully. However, the witnesses are protected from answering any questions that may incriminate them. Additionally, any statements made by the witnesses during the examination can be reduced to writing and used as evidence in court.

In criminal trials these two sections are very important as contradictions in statements given by witnesses under section 164 and 161 are put to test during trial and forms the most important basis of cross examination .

For more information kindly contact at



Board Resolution passed by Companies


A board resolution is a formal document that records the decisions and actions taken by the board of directors of a company. The specific ingredients of a  resolution may vary depending on the nature of the decision being made and the requirements of the company’s governing documents and applicable laws and regulations. However, some common elements of a resolution include:

  1. Heading: The heading of the  resolution should include the name of the company, the date on which the resolution was passed, and a reference to the section of the law or the company’s governing documents under which the resolution is being passed.
  2. Introduction: The introduction should provide some background information on the matter being considered, including any relevant facts or circumstances that led to the decision.
  3. Resolution clause: This clause should clearly state the decision being made by the board. It should be specific and unambiguous, and should include any necessary details such as the amount of funds being allocated, the terms of a contract, or the appointment of a new officer.
  4. Voting: The resolution should also include information about the voting process, including the number of directors who voted in favor, against or abstained from voting.
  5. Signatures: The  resolution should be signed by the chairman of the meeting, and by all the directors who participated in the meeting.
  6. Record keeping: It is important to ensure that the resolution is properly recorded and maintained as part of the company’s official records.

In summary, a  resolution should be clear, concise, and accurate, and should reflect the decisions and actions taken by the board in accordance with the company’s governing documents and applicable laws and regulations.

For more information kindly visit



NDPS Act, 1985

                                      NDPS Act, 1985

Provisions for bail   when arrested under NDPS Act, 1985.

Section 25 IEA reads as under:

“25. Confession to police-officer not to be proved. ––

No confession made to a police-officer, shall be proved as against a person accused of any offence.”

Section 27 IEA reads as under: “27. How much of information received from accused may be proved. –– Provided that, when any fact is deposed to as discovered inconsequence of information received from a person accused of any offence, in the custody of a police officer, so much of such information, whether it amounts to a confession or not, as relates distinctly to the fact thereby discovered, may be proved.”

Section 67 NDPS Act reads as under:

“67. Power to call for information, etc.—Any officer referred to in section 42 who is authorised in this behalf by the Central Government or a State Government may, during the course of any enquiry in connection with the contravention of any provision of this Act,—

  • call for information from any person for the purpose of satisfying himself whether there has been any contravention of the provisions of this Act or any rule or order made thereunder;
  • require any person to produce or deliver any document or thing useful or relevant to the enquiry;
  • examine any person acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case.”

The  Hon’ble  Delhi High Court in State v. Navjot Sandhu @ Afsan Guru Crl. A. No. 80/2003 wherein this Hon‟ble Court, after placing reliance on Pulukuri  Kottaya and Ors v. The King-Emperor 1946 SCC OnLine PC 49, and several other judgments of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court and other courts, summarized the law governing Section 27 IEA as follows:

“396. We, therefore,  hold that in order that Section 27 may be brought in aid, the prosecution must establish:—

  1. That consequent to the information given by the accused, it led to the discovery of some fact stated by him.
  2. The fact discovered must be one which was not within the knowledge of the police and the knowledge of the fact was for the first time derived from the information given by the accused.
  3. Information given by the accused must lead to the discovery of a fact which is the direct outcome of such information.
  4. The discovery of the fact must be in relation to a material object and of course would then embrace within its fold the mental condition i.e. the knowledge of the accused of the place from where the object was produced and the knowledge that it was there.
  5. Only such portion of the information as is distinctly connected with the said discovery is admissible
  6. The discovery of the fact must relate to the commission of some offence.”

Section 34 IEA reads as under:

“34. [Entries in books of account, including those maintained in an electronic from], when relevant. –– [Entries in books of account, including those maintained in an electronic from], regularly kept in the course of business, are relevant whenever they refer to a matter into which the Court has to inquire, but such statements shall not alone be sufficient evidence to charge any person with liability.

          Bail when arrested under NDPS Act, 1985

The  Honble Supreme Court in CBI v. V.C. Shukla and Ors., (1998) 3 SCC 410 wherein it was observed that:”

“17. From a plain reading of the Section it is manifest that to make an entry relevant thereunder it must be shown that it has been made in a book, that book is a book of account and that book of account has been regularly kept in the course of business. From the above Section it is also manifest that even if the above requirements are fulfilled and the entry becomes admissible as relevant evidence, still, the statement made therein shall not alone be sufficient evidence to charge any person with liability. It is thus seen that while the first part of the section speaks of the relevancy of the entry as evidence, the second park speaks, in a negative way, of its evidentiary value for charging a person with a liability. It will, therefore, be necessary for us to first ascertain whether the entries in the documents, with which we are concerned, fulfil the requirements of the above section so as to be admissible in evidence and if this question is answered in the affirmative then only its probative value need be assessed.

                                     NDPS Act, 1985

The operative paras of the judgment of Tofan Singh v. State of Tamil Nadu, (2021) 4 SCC 1 which categorically held that Section 67 NDPS Act is hit by Section 25 of the Evidence Act  in this regard are reproduced below:

“155. Thus, to arrive at the conclusion that a confessional statement made before an officer designated under section 42 or section 53 can be the basis to convict a person under the NDPS Act, without any non obstante clause doing away with section 25 of the Evidence Act, and without any safeguards, would be a direct infringement of the constitutional guarantees contained in Articles 14, 20(3) and 21 of the Constitution of India.

The Delhi High Court coordinate bench judgment viz., Amit Ranjan v. Narcotics Control Bureau, Delhi (2022) SCC OnLine Del 1532 wherein the court granted bail in similar circumstances by holding that CDR details and monetary transactions are seen at the time of trial. The relevant portion of the judgment reads as under:

“50. It is essential to observe that the aspects of the CDR details and alleged connection between K.K. Pharma Solutions and Vinay Pharmaceuticals and the applicant and the co-accused persons and monetary transactions between them being in relation to illicit trafficking of narcotic or psychotropic substances can only be gauged at trial. In view thereof, there having been no recovery of any alleged narcotic or psychotropic substances of a commercial quantity having been effected from the applicant and apart from the confessional statements made by the applicant and the coaccused which confessional statement made by the applicant has already been retracted, presently, this Court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the applicant is not guilty of the commission of the said offences and in view of his clean antecedents that he is not likely to commit any offence whilst on bail…‖

For more information kindly visit




Principles followed before granting bail

              Principles followed before grant of bail

The Hon’ble  Suprem Court has  time and again laid down Principles followed before granting bail in relation to exercise of discretionary power for grant of bail, particularly, when the bails are refused by the Courts below.

While considering the application for bail Courts always   consider the following conditions prior to grant of bail and Principles followed before granting bail

i)nature of the charge,
ii)the nature of the evidence,
iii)the severity of punishment to which the accused may be liable if convicted,
iv)the antecedents of the man applying for bail that might suggest that he is likely to commit serious offences while on bail.

The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Ash Mohammad v. Shiv Raj Singh, (2012) 9 SCC 446 observed as under:

“17. We are absolutely conscious that liberty of a person should not be lightly dealt with, for deprivation of liberty of a person has immense impact on the mind of a person. Incarceration creates a concavity in the personality of an individual. Sometimes it causes a sense of vacuum. Needless to emphasise, the sacrosanctity of liberty is paramount in a civilised society. However, in a democratic body polity which is wedded to the rule of law an individual is expected to grow within the social restrictions sanctioned by law. The individual liberty is restricted by larger social interest and its deprivation must have due sanction of law. In an orderly society an individual is expected to live with dignity having respect for law and also giving due respect to others’ rights. It is a well-accepted principle that the concept of liberty is not in the realm of absolutism but is a restricted one. The cry of the collective for justice, its desire for peace and harmony and its necessity for security cannot be allowed to be trivialised. The life of an individual living in a society governed by the rule of law has to be regulated and such regulations which are the source in law subserve the social balance and function as a significant instrument for protection of human rights and security of the collective. It is because fundamentally laws are made for their obedience so that every member of the society lives peacefully in a society to achieve his individual as well as social interest. That is why Edmond Burke while discussing about liberty opined, “it is regulated freedom”.

18. It is also to be kept in mind that individual liberty cannot be accentuated to such an extent or elevated to such a high pedestal which would bring in anarchy or disorder in the society. The prospect of greater justice requires that law and order should prevail in a civilised milieu. True it is, there can be no arithmetical formula for fixing the parameters in precise exactitude but the adjudication should express not only application of mind but also exercise of jurisdiction on accepted and established norms. Law and order in a society protect the established precepts and see to it that contagious crimes do not become epidemic. In an organised society the concept of liberty basically requires citizens to be responsible and not to disturb the tranquillity and safety which every well-meaning person desires.

Not for nothing J. Oerter stated:

“Personal liberty is the right to act without interference within the limits of the law.”

  1. Thus analysed, it is clear that though liberty is a greatly cherished value in the life of an individual, it is a controlled and restricted one and no element in the society can act in a manner by consequence of which the life or liberty of others is jeopardised, for the rational collective does not countenance an anti-social or anti-collective act.


The grant of bail in exercise of discretionary power of the Court         is  necessarily exercised in a judicious manner and not as a matter         of  course. Therefore it can be concluded that  prior to grant of           bail ,  certain Principles followed before granting bail  and precautions are exercised by courts considering Principles followed before granting bail. For more information click on


Tapan Choudhury


Transfer Petition

Transfer Petition in Supreme Court of India

Transfer Petition in Supreme Court of India

Transfer Petition in Supreme Court of India are usually filed in Divorce Cases in Matrimonial Cases.

This happens when one party files a divorce case in one state and the other party is unable to appear due to unavoidable circumstances in the trial court of another state .

Usually when the woman who is non working is resident of another state and the husband is residing in another state, the wife may present a petition for transfer before the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

Grounds may include distance , threat or even health reasons depending upon circumstances of the case in case of Transfer Petition in Supreme Court of India.

Every transfer petition is accompanied by a copy of the matter which is pending in a trial court in another state.

         Stay of proceedings for which transfer is sought

Caveat Petition  is usually accompanied by an application for stay. It is because till the Hon’ble Supreme Court decides the transfer petition , the divorce case or any other case for which transfer is sought is stayed.

When other cases already pending in the place to which transfer is sought

For example when a wife files for transfer  petition in matrimonial cases and she has already filed cases in the trial court within the jurisdiction where she resides then it also acts as a ground that since the other party is already appearing in those cases he may as well appear in this .This makes the case stronger for the woman.

I have only expressed my opinion based  on my experiences . The examples i have cited as mostly in matrimonial cases and in most cases the grounds are similar as stated  here in above. However there are instances of    transfer petition for other matters also. For information kindly visit


Tapan Choudhury


Mutual Consent Divorce

Mutual Consent Divorce

Mutual Consent Divorce | Waiver Applications in case of  longer separation

Mutual Consent Divorce is the easiest and the fastest mode of dissolution of Marriage. Marriages which are governed by the Hindu Marriage Act or Special Marriage Act and the Indian Divorce Act all have provisions for Mutual Consent Divorce.


S.13 B Under Hindu Marriage Act 1955
  1. One year separation prior to filing the divorce petition
  2. Proof of Marriage in the form of Photographs, marriage Certificates and Wedding Cards.
  3. Details of children if any
  4. Terms agreed upon between the parties

It basically works on the principle that when both parties have agreed to a settlement to dissolve their marriage and have agreed to each others terms and conditions nothing else is required.

The Mutual Consent Divorce Petition will contain the date of marriage, date of separation and any terms and conditions have might have been agreed upon between the parties.

There are times when both parties are working and have no children , in such cases parties resolve to dissolve their marriage without any such terms and conditions when no  payment is agreed upon. In such cases the main condition that remains is none of the parties will have any right or claim against each other after dissolution of marriage .

Once a joint petition signed by both parties are filed , Both parties are required to be present in court for the first motion wherein statement of both parties are taken.

Thereafter both parties are given 6 months time for reconciliation after which a second motion petition can be filed . In Delhi a second motion petition is filed, however in Gurgaon, Faridabad , Greater Noida  and Ghaziabad a second motion is not required to be filed , a next date after 6 months is given. In the second motion again statement of parties will be recorded. This is the last time one has to visit the court for hearing. Thereafter if the court allows within 7 days divorce decree is passed.

Now the 6 months cooling period can be waived with an application if the date of separation is more than 18 months. In such cases second motion petition can be presented for hearing within a month and so both motions can be over within a month or so. This is subject to the Court allowing the waiver application of 6 months.

In case of S.28 of the Special Marriage Act 1954 | the process is similar

S. 10A of the Indian Divorce Act 1869| 2 years separation prior to filing

However in case of Christians who are governed under he  S. 10A of the Indian Divorce Act 1869, the  only requirement which is different from other Acts is the date of separation should be more than 2 years prior to filing  Mutual Consent Divorce.petition. For more information kindly visit

This whole process is very simple and easy .

If you require any assistance kindly contact at 9873628941
Tapan Choudhury
Caveat Petition renewal

Caveat Petition Renewal

                                 Caveat Petition Renewal

A caveat Petition   once filed is valid for 90 days , however upon expiry of 90 days one may file a fresh petition .

This is in case no appeal or petition is filed by the opposite party within 90 days and there is furthur apprehension that the opposite party may prefer filing a caveat petition in the supreme court , one may file afresh after expiry of 90 days.

Every caveat petition is accompanied by a vakalatnama and details of the judgment against which the opposite party may approach the supreme court.

Caveat Petition renewal can either be filed by an Advocate on record or in-person that is the party itself .

In-person filing procedure is slightly different from the way it is filed by a registered Advocate on record.

Caveat petitions which are also referred to as caveat applications are registered.

caveat petitions are filed in accordance with provisions under the civil procedure code namely section 148A .

Right to lodge a caveat.Previous    Next

1[148 A. Right to lodge a caveat.— (1)Where an application is expected to be made, or has been made, in a suit or proceeding instituted, or about to be instituted, in a Court , any person claiming a right to appear before the Court on the hearing of such application may lodge a caveat in respect thereof.

(2) Where a caveat has been lodged under sub-section (1), the person by whom the caveat has been lodged (hereinafter referred to as the caveator) shall serve a notice of the caveat by registered post, acknowledgement due, on the person by whom the application has been, or is expected to be, made, under sub-section (1).

(3) Where, after a caveat has been lodged under sub-section (1), any application is filed in any suit or proceeding, the Court, shall serve a notice of the application on the caveator.

(4) Where a notice of any caveat has been served on the applicant, he shall forthwith furnish the caveator at the caveators expense, with a copy of the application made by him and also with copies of any paper or document which has been, or may be, filed by him in support of the application.

(5) Where a caveat has been lodged under sub-section (1), such caveat shall not remain in force after the expiry of ninety days from the date on which it was lodged unless the application referred to in sub-section (1) has been made before the expiry of the said period.]

 Caveat petition renewal can be done prior to expiry of 90 days.

Caveat Renewal can also be done by filing afresh after expiry of 90 days.

Caveat Petition is necessary and one should not avail it as an option but as mandatory especially in the supreme court because thats the last hope of a litigant. 

It is an opportunity one should avail without hesitation. A caveat petition is accompanied by a vakalatnama duly signed by the advocate on record as well as the client.

It can be file as soon as the required documents are placed on record in a specific manner .

Once registered one can relax and be sure that the opportunity of being heard on the first date of hearing will  be allowed with certainity.


Tapan Choudhury,



Click one of our contacts below to chat on WhatsApp