By Vimata Debi & Ors vs Sri Amitava Gupta & Anr
2022 Latest Caselaw 8433 Cal

 7    16.12.                       SA 29 of 2012
      2022
AGM
/RK
                     CAN 1 of 2011 (Old CAN 11302 of 2011)
  B                  CAN 4 of 2017 (Old CAN 9543 of 2017)
 Ct                  CAN 5 of 2019 (Old CAN 9606 of 2019)
 07


               Rajendra Sirohia, since deceased being substituted
               by Vimata Debi & Ors
                                       Vs
                             Sri Amitava Gupta & Anr


               Mr. Ganesh Prasad Shaw,
                                             ... For the Appellants.

               Mr. Sounak Bhattacharya,
                                             ... For the respondents.

This is to consider application being CAN 4 of

2017 for enhancement of the occupational charges,

already granted at the rate of Rs. 10,000/- per month.

CAN 5 of 2019 is, however, for reduction of quantum of

occupational charges for a change in the circumstances.

Seen the opposition and reply filed in connection with

these two CAN applications.

Mr. Sounak Bhattacharya, learned advocate

appearing for the respondents (being petitioners of CAN

4 of 2017) submits that in view of the present price

index, the quantum of occupational charges granted in

the year 2012, may be reviewed giving a moderate

enhancement of occupational charges atleast at the rate

of Rs. 20,000/- per month. According to Mr.

Bhattacharya, the subject property is located in a

popular area in Kolkata.

Admittedly, the occupational charges was

assessed at the rate of Rs. 10,000/- per month in the

year 2012. Passage of time and rise of price index are

the fundamental grounds in support of proposed

enhancement.

In support of the proposed reduction of

occupational charges, for a change in the

circumstances, Mr. Ganesh Prasad Shaw, learned

advocate appearing for the appellants/defendants

submits that earning of the petitioners/judgment debtor

has been substantially reduced, because the

establishment, where the petitioner was employed

earlier, has been shut down, and as a result of which

the petitioner has suffered a set blow in his income part.

Mr. Shaw, however, proposes for enhancement of

10% of occupational charges upon consideration of the

provisions of Premises Tenancy Act.

Having considered the submission of both sides,

and bearing in mind the rise of price index since 2012, a

little enhancement of quantum, instead of reduction of

amount is justified. Let there be an enhancement of

occupational charges at the rate of Rs. 13,000/- per

month from Rs.10,000/- per month with effect from the

date of this order.

The appeal be listed for hearing in the third week

of February, 2023, subject to the completion of the

formalities, if there be any.

Both the CAN applications are thus disposed of.

(Subhasis Dasgupta, J)