Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Sri Sumit Dey vs The Bidhannagar Municipal ... on 29 August, 2022
06. 29.08.2022
Ct. No.6
Tanmoy
F.M.A. 835 of 2021
(M.A.T. 672 of 2021)
Sri Sumit Dey
-Versus-
The Bidhannagar Municipal Corpporation & Ors.
With
IA No: C.A.N. 1 of 2021
Mr. Soumik Pramanick, Adv.,
...for the appellant.
Mr. S. Bandopadhyay, Adv.,
Mr. Arka Kr. Nag, Adv.,
Mr. Tirthankar Dey, Adv.
...for the Bidhannagar
Municipal Corporation.
Mr. Syed Nurul Arefin, Adv.,
Mr. Rahul Singh, Adv.
...for the respondent no. 6.
By consent of the parties, the appeal and the
connected application are taken up together for hearing.
A judgment and order dated April 12, 2021,
whereby the appellant's writ petition being W.P.A. 15938
of 2019 was dismissed, is under challenge in the present
appeal.
It appears that the appellant's father owned a
property being plot no. 83, Block-DL, Sector-II, Salt
Lake City, Kolkata - 700091.
The appellant contended before the learned Single
Judge that his father died intestate. His mother
manufactured a Will and obtained probate thereof. On
the strength of such probate, she sold the said property
to the private respondent herein. The private respondent
has constructed a residential building on the said plot of
land. The appellant has applied for revocation of the
probate that his mother obtained in respect of the
alleged forged Will of his father. The appellant has also
obtained an order of injunction against the private
respondent in a suit for declaration and injunction. The
prayer of the appellant before the learned Single Judge
was for a direction on the Authorities to demolish the
building that has been constructed by the private
respondent on the concerned plot of land.
The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ
petition, making the following observations:-
"It appears from the submissions of the parties that the
private respondent purchased the property in question upon
payment of consideration and the Bidhannagar Municipal
Corporation has sanctioned a building plan and thereafter
issued a completion certificate after the construction was over.
The petitioner claims ownership of the land in question.
The Suit filed by the petitioner praying for revocation of the
grant of probate is pending consideration before the learned
Court.
In the event, the petitioner is successful in the said suit
then he may take necessary consequential steps pursuant to
the order passed by the Court. No relief can be granted to the
petitioner at this stage."
Being aggrieved, the writ petitioner is before us by
way of this appeal.
We have heard learned Counsel for the parties. The
writ Court will not go into title disputes or whether the
appellant's mother forged a Will and obtained probate
thereof. In the event the appellant succeeds in the
proceedings pending before the civil fora, he may take
necessary consequential steps.
We have been told that the private respondent
herein has also filed a suit claiming declaration and
injunction against the appellant herein, which is
pending.
The Bidhannagar Municipal Corporation tells us
that the building in question has been constructed by
the private respondent in accordance with the plan
sanctioned by the Corporation. Completion certificate
has also been issued in favour of the private respondent.
Under those circumstances, no relief can be
granted to the appellant in the present proceedings. The
grievance of the writ petitioner/appellant is of a nature
which must necessarily be ventilated before a civil forum
and not before the writ Court. The learned Single Judge
has rightly rejected the writ application.
The appeal being F.M.A. 835 of 2021 and the
connected application being IA No: C.A.N. 1 of 2021 are
accordingly dismissed.
Let urgent photostat certified copies of this order, if
applied for, be made available to the parties upon
compliance with all necessary formalities.
(Rai Chattopadhyay, J.) (Arijit Banerjee, J.)
