Smt. Manorama Biswas vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 4952 Cal

September 21, 2021
   ARDR

          (37)
                                        WPA 14239 of 2021

                                      Smt. Manorama Biswas
                                                Vs.
                                  The State of West Bengal & Ors.

                     Mr. Mrityunjay Goswami,
                     Mr. Parikshit Goswami,
                                                           ...for the petitioners.
                     Mr. Debjit Mukherjee,
                     Ms. Susmita Chatterjee,
                     Ms. Dipanwita Ganguly,
                     Mr. K. Bhamacharya,
                                                     ...for the respondent no.5.

Mr. Chandi Charan De, Ms. Reshmi Rahaman, ...for the State.

The petitioner's grievance is that she was

allotted freehold title deed vide Deed No. 1-36 dated

16th April, 1990 and the plot inscribed in the deed was

LOP-79. The petitioner received an intimation from the

District Rehabilitation Officer, Barasat, 24 Parganas

(North) on 20th December, 2020 to the effect that there

is a clerical mistake in recording the plot number

which should be LOP-76 instead of LOP-79. The

petitioner was requested to appear before the

concerned authority for such rectification.

In the meantime, a chain of incidents occurred

with regard to the said plot.

The private respondent who holds a power of

attorney issued by the legal heirs of one Satish

Chandra Biswas, since deceased, filed a suit for

declaration of title and injunction before the trial

Court which was dismissed and an appeal was filed

which was also dismissed. A second appeal preferred

against the said judgment is subjudice (SAT 421 of

2019).

The petitioner also filed a suit for eviction

against a third person and obtained an order of

eviction. During pendency of the execution proceeding,

the private respondent appeared before the executing

Court and submitted documents to substantiate his

possession in respect of the property in dispute. An

application under order XXI Rule 99, 100 of the Code

of Civil Procedure was filed before the learned

executing Court which is pending (Misc. Case no. 10 of

2003).

It appears that the matter in dispute in the

present writ petition is also the subject matter of the

Misc. Case before the executing Court as well as the

second appeal pending before this Court.

The petitioner is at liberty to place her case

before the Executing Court, in accordance with law.

This Court, in its extra ordinary jurisdiction

under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, cannot

deal with the merits of the present application which is

subjudice before the regular civil forum.

In view of the same, WPA 14239 of 2021 is

dismissed as not maintainable. However, there shall

be no order as to costs.

Since no affidavit has been invited, the

allegations made in the writ petition are deemed to be

not admitted.

Urgent certified website copy of this order, if

applied for, be given to the parties upon compliance of

all formalities.

(Suvra Ghosh, J.)