Calcutta High Court
Rakhi Deb vs The Kolkata Municipal on 14 September, 2023
OD-2
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Civil Appellate Jurisdiction
Original Side
IA No.GA/1/2021
APO/131/2021
WPO /1226 / 2023
RAKHI DEB.
VS.
THE KOLKATA MUNICIPAL
CORPORATION AND ORS.
Appearance:
Mr. Aniruddha Chatterjee. Advocate.
Mr. Abir Lal Chakraborty, Advocate
Ms. Sonali Ghosh, Advocate
...for the appellant/petitioner
Mr. Biswajit Mukherjee, Advocate
Ms. Manish Nath, Advocate
for KMC.
Mr. Gunjan Shah, Advocate,
Miss. Shreya Agarwal, Advocate
For respondent nos. 5 to 8
Mr. Arindam Pal, Advocate
For respondent no. 9.
BEFORE:
The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARIJIT BANERJEE
The Hon'ble JUSTICE APURBA SINHA RAY
Date: September 14, 2023.
THE COURT: Affidavit of service filed in Court today be
kept with the records.
This appeal is directed against a judgment and order dated
June 20, 2023, whereby the appellant's writ application being
WPO/1226/2023, was disposed of by a learned Single Judge of this
Court.
The appellant approached the learned Single Judge with the
grievance that without any prior notice to the appellant, who is the owner
of premises no. 628, Rabindra Sarani, Kolkata, and without there being
any proceeding, a separate premises being No. T628A, Rabindra Sarani
has been carved out from the original premises no. 628. It was submitted
that T628A, Rabindra Sarani is recorded as thika property in the records
maintained by the Kolkata Municipal Corporation. This is wholly illegal.
The learned Judge noticed that a proceeding is pending before
the Controller, Kolkata Thika Tenancy in connection with the premises in
question. On that ground the learned Judge declined to interfere.
Learned Judge disposed of the writ petition with the following
observation:
"Learned advocate representing the Kolkata Municipal
Corporation submits, upon instruction that, the two premises are
assessed separately. Premises no. T628A, Rabindra Sarani is
recorded as thika property. Proceeding regarding the adjudication of
thika is pending consideration before the Controller, Kolkata Thika
Tenancy and the recording of thika is in existence since 1988-89.
After hearing all the parties and upon perusal of the documents
the Court is of the opinion that it will not be proper at this stage to
correct the said recording. As and when there is adjudication by the
Controller, Kolkata Thika Tenancy, necessary steps shall be taken by
the Kolkata Municipal Corporation to rectify the records in the event
there is any error in the recording of the status of the property.
There is no property tax due in respect of the property in
question. It will be open for the petitioner to follow up the matter with
the Controller, Kolkata Thika Tenancy. After the adjudication is made,
the Kolkata Municipal Corporation shall take steps in accordance with
the said adjudication.
It is further made clear that the name of the petitioner is already
recorded as the person liable to pay tax in respect of the property at
628, Rabindra Sarani."
Being aggrieved, the writ petitioner has come up by way of this
appeal.
Given the nature of the appellant's grievance, we are of the view
that the Corporation must explain as to when and how the separate
premises being T628A, Rabindra Sarani, Kolkata came into existence.
The respondents in the writ petition were not called upon to file
affidavits. Hence, their response to the grievance of the appellant is not
on record. We feel that the respondents in the writ petition, who are also
the respondents in the appeal, should file affidavit-in-opposition to the
said application to bring on record their respective responses.
Let affidavit-in-opposition be filed within three weeks from date
(October 5, 2023); reply thereto, if any, be filed within one week
thereafter (October 12, 2023).
List the matter four weeks hence [October 12, 2023] under the
heading 'Hearing'. It is understood that the appeal and the application
will be heard together.
(ARIJIT BANERJEE, J.)
(APURBA SINHA RAY, J.)
dg/
