Shri Jaichandlal Ashok Kumar & Company ... vs Nawab Yossuf & Anr
2025 Latest Caselaw 1758 Cal/2

Calcutta High Court

Shri Jaichandlal Ashok Kumar & Company ... vs Nawab Yossuf & Anr on 13 June, 2025

Author: Shampa Sarkar

Bench: Shampa Sarkar

OD -3&4
                            ORDER SHEET
                   IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                 ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
                            ORIGINAL SIDE

                           IA NO. GA/4/2023
                             In EC/125/2015
          SHRI JAICHANDLAL ASHOK KUMAR & COMPANY PVT.LTD.
                                    Vs
                        NAWAB YOSSUF & ANR.

                           IA NO. GA/5/2024
                            In EC/125/2015
          SHRI JAICHANDLAL ASHOK KUMAR & COMPANY PVT.LTD.
                                   Vs
                        NAWAB YOSSUF & ANR.

 BEFORE:
 The Hon'ble JUSTICE SHAMPA SARKAR

Date: 13th June, 2025.

Appearance:

Mr. Surojit Nath Mitra, Sr.Adv.

Mr. Rajarshi Datta, Adv.

Mr. Deepak Kr. Jain, Adv.

Mr. Sarbojit Mukherjee, Adv.

Mr. Abhisek Dutta, Adv.

.... for the decree-holder Mr. Abhrajit Mitra, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Sarbapriya Mukherjee, Adv.

Mr. B. Kumar, Adv.

...for the petitioner

Ms. Piyali Sengupta, Adv.

Mr. Paroma Sengupta, Adv.

...for KMC Mr. Debnath Ghosh,Sr. Adv.

Ms. Sananda Ganguly, Adv.

Mr. Shubradip Roy, Adv.

...for the legal heir of judgment-debtor no. 1

The Court: Director General (Building), Kolkata Municipal

Corporation has filed a report. The report indicates that the building plan had

been prepared by the developer, as per the prevailing KMC Building Rules,

2009. However, it has been stated that the plan did not depict the allocation of

the owners' allotted shares. Under such circumstances, although the plan can

be sanctioned as per law, the other part of the order of my predecessor that the

plan has to be as per the agreement, is required to be complied with.

Mr. Debnath Ghosh, learned senior advocate has submitted that

unless the plan prepared by the developer conforms to the agreement, such

plan should not be placed for sanction.

Mr. Surojit Nath Mitra, learned senior advocate submits that the plan

may not have shown the allocation of the owner, but the plan provides for the

allocation of the owners' shares as also the common areas to be sold to the

third parties. Thus the owners' share, developers' share and the common

portion to be sold, have been provided for in the plan, even if the same have not

been marked.

Mr. Abhrajit Mitra, learned senior advocate presses the application

for addition of party, being IA GA 5 of 2024 and submits that the some rights

have been acquired in the subject property by the applicant. The applicant

would also have an interest in the proceeding. Under such circumstances, IA

GA 5 of 2024 is taken up first.

Let these matters appear on 20th June, 2025 at 12 noon.

(SHAMPA SARKAR, J.) TR/