Mrs. Urmila Singh And Another vs C.E.S.C. Limited And Others
2026 Latest Caselaw 68 Cal/2

Calcutta High Court

Mrs. Urmila Singh And Another vs C.E.S.C. Limited And Others on 13 January, 2026

Author: Rajasekhar Mantha

Bench: Rajasekhar Mantha

od-3
                             ORDER SHEET
                     IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                      CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                              ORIGINAL SIDE

                               APOT/329/2025
                              IA NO: GA/1/2025

                    MRS. URMILA SINGH AND ANOTHER
                                    VS
                      C.E.S.C. LIMITED AND OTHERS

  BEFORE:
HON'BLE JUSTICE RAJASEKHAR MANTHA
HON'BLE JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR GUPTA
Date : 13th January, 2026.
                                                                      Appearance :
                                                     Mr. Gopal Ch. Ghosh, Sr. Adv.
                                                               Mr. S. T. Mina, Adv.
                                                           Mr. Raja Mantosh, Adv.
                                       Ms. Smruti Rekha Das, Adv. ...for appellants.

                                                         Mr. Rajarshi Dutta, Adv.
                                    Mr. Pranab Sharma, Adv. ...for respondent no.4.

Ms. Susmita Chatterjee, Adv. ...for State.

Mr. Debanjan Mukherjee, Adv. ...for CESC.

Ms. Manju Manot, Sr. Adv.

Ms. Amrita Pandey, Adv.

Mr. Ghanshyam Pandey, Adv. ...for respondent nos.5-7.

1. The appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 18 th

December, 2025 in WPO/807/2025 passed by a learned single Bench

of this Court. Given the large number of allegations against the

appellants/writ petitioners by the other occupants of the building, the

single Bench decided to call for affidavits and fixed the matter for

hearing tomorrow.

2. The allegations against the petitioners are that all the other occupants

of this premises are using it for commercial purpose. The fire licence

for the building has been issued considering the fact that the building

is a commercial building. The commercial office space are used

primarily by advocates practicing inter alia in this court.

3. The appellants/writ petitioners are, however, using the roof of the

building after allegedly erecting unauthorized construction thereon.

4. The Fire Licence of the building, is not being renewed since the

petitioners/appellants were using the roof as a residence with LPG

Gas Cylinders.

5. An application to the CESC for loop meter connection by the applicant

was filed in the year 2017, which was resisted by the other occupants.

The CESC could not inspect the property in view of the obstruction

and objection of the other occupants. No independent connection

could be given to the appellants.

6. This court is of the view that the parties would lose a forum if the

issue is decided by this court. The single Bench may decide the

matter after receiving affidavits as already directed in its order dated

18th December, 2025.

7. The time to file affidavit in opposition to the writ petition is extended

by a period of three days from date; reply thereto, if any, be filed

within a three days thereafter.

8. The appellants are at liberty to mention the matter for early hearing of

the writ petition subject to the business of the learned single Bench

permits.

9. It is made absolutely clear that the single Bench shall proceed to

decide the matter independently and uninfluenced by any observation

made hereinabove.

10. APOT/329/2025 stands disposed of.

11. No order as to costs.

(RAJASEKHAR MANTHA, J.)

(AJAY KUMAR GUPTA, J.)

pkd/pa