A fairly crowded courtroom in the Commercial Division of the Calcutta High Court on Monday saw a familiar landlord–tenant dispute take a sharp legal turn. Justice Aniruddha Roy refused to send a lease renewal fight between New India Assurance Company Limited and HDFC Bank Limited to arbitration, holding that the dispute no longer flowed from the expired lease deed.
The ruling came on December 23, the same day arguments were heard, and brought an end-at least for now-to HDFC Bank’s attempt to divert the civil suit away from court proceedings.
Read also:- Patna High Court Sets Aside Suicide Abetment Conviction, Says Marriage Discord Alone
Background
The case traces back to a lease executed in September 2014 for a commercial property in Kolkata. The original owner, Williamson Magor, later transferred the premises to HDFC Limited. After HDFC’s merger, HDFC Bank stepped into the landlord’s shoes.
That lease ran its full nine-year course and expired on March 31, 2023. New India Assurance, the tenant, did not vacate. Instead, it claimed that a series of emails exchanged in May 2022 showed both sides had already agreed to renew-or rather, freshly execute-a lease for another ten years starting April 2023.
Rent, importantly, continued to be accepted. Matters escalated when HDFC Bank issued an eviction notice in September 2023, citing regulatory requirements under banking laws. New India Assurance responded by filing a civil suit seeking specific performance-essentially asking the court to compel execution of a new lease.
HDFC Bank countered with an application under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, arguing that the arbitration clause in the 2014 lease covered the dispute.
Read also:- Madhya Pradesh High Court Steps In, Scraps Railway-Constituted Arbitral Tribunal in Cable
Court’s Observations
Justice Roy did not mince words while unpacking the issue. The court accepted that an arbitration clause did exist in the old lease, and also noted that the insurer remained in possession with rent being accepted.
But the real question, the bench said, was simpler: What exactly is the dispute about?
“The parent lease admittedly expired on March 31, 2023,” the bench observed, adding that once a lease ends, “the question of renewal does not arise.”
The judge pointed out that New India Assurance was not claiming any right under the old lease. Instead, it was seeking enforcement of what it described as a concluded contract arising from later correspondence. That claim, the court said, stood on its own footing.
At this stage, Justice Roy clarified, the court was not judging whether the insurer would ultimately win or lose. “The plaint may succeed, may fail at trial,” the order noted, but merits were irrelevant while deciding whether arbitration could be forced.
Since the claim was for execution of a fresh lease, and not for enforcing any term of the expired one, the arbitration clause could not be stretched to cover it.
Read also:- Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects State's Land Acquisition Appeal, Upholds Enhanced
Decision
Holding that the subject matter of the suit was not covered by the arbitration agreement in the 2014 lease, the court dismissed HDFC Bank’s application. The Section 8 plea failed, and the civil suit will continue before the Commercial Division. No order on costs was passed.
Case Title: New India Assurance Company Limited vs HDFC Bank Limited
Case No.: IA No. GA-COM/2/2025 in CS-COM/41/2025
Case Type: Commercial Suit – Application under Section 8, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996
Decision Date: 23 December 2025