Purnima Roy And Anr vs Hanuman Prasad Shaw And Anr
2022 Latest Caselaw 8643 Cal

22.12.2022
 KC(2)
                                F.M.A.T. 486 of 2022
                               Purnima Roy and Anr.
                                      -versus-
                           Hanuman Prasad Shaw and Anr.
                                        With
                                   CAN 1 of 2022



             Mr. Sounak Bhattacharya,
             Mr. Shubham Gupta,
             Mr. Tanmoy Kumar Dey................For the appellants.

             Mr. Supratik Shyamal,
             Mr. Milan Kanti Mandal................For the respondents.

We do not find any merit in this appeal.

The impugned judgment and order dated 10th

November, 2022 is substantially based on the

admission of the appellants/plaintiffs as recorded in the

order that they had encroached upon the

respondents'/defendants' property at 6B, Chandibari

Street, Kolkata and then attempted to stop the

respondents/defendants from making construction on

their own premises.

Mr. Bhattacharya, learned advocate for the

appellants submits that this admission has been

wrongly recorded and that his clients are entitled to

obtain an order restraining the respondents from

making construction.

We are afraid that it is settled law that if an

admission has been recorded by the court, that the

admission was wrongly recorded could only be

adjudicated by that particular court and not by the

appellate court.

In those circumstances, this appeal (F.M.A.T. 486

of 2022) and the connected application (CAN 1 of 2022)

are disposed of with the above observation and liberty

to the appellants to take proper steps before the learned

trial court. In case the contention of the

appellants/plaintiffs succeeds it would be open to the

learned court below to set aside or modify the impugned

order.

(I.P. MUKERJI, J.)

(BISWAROOP CHOWDHURY, J.)