SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Cal) 138

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
ARIJIT BANERJEE, RAI CHATTOPADHYAY, JJ.
Dev All Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
The Kolkata Municipal Corporation & Ors. – Respondents
APO 45 of 2017 With WPO 880 of 2011, APO 46 of 2017, WPO 880 of 2011, APO 47 of 2017, WPO 880 of 2011
Decided on : 12-03-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Saptangshu Basu, Ld Senior Advocate: Mr. Dipankar Halder.
For the Respondent: Mr. Alak Kumar Ghosh, Mr. Gopal Chandra Das, Mr. Debangshu Mondal, Mr. Jaydip Kar, Mr. Nirmalya Biswas, Mr. Debdeep Sinha.

The court affirmed the principle that statutory authorities must obtain the consent of all property owners before sanctioning additional construction, particularly when ownership rights are contested.

Headnote:(A) Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980 - Section 393 and Section 397 - Unauthorized construction - Writ petition allowed by Single Bench affirmed by Division Bench; petitioners, as owners of 50% undivided roof, had rights exceeding misrepresented by extra sanctioned plan; Court held that proper consent was required for additional construction, which was illegal - Appeals dismissed. (Paras 12-28)

(B) Jurisdiction of writ court - Writ jurisdiction can decide matters involving statutory duty violations and property rights, despite the existence of title disputes; as title deeds are undisputed, the writ court's jurisdiction is proper for the redress of such grievances. (Paras 10, 24)

Table of Content
1. overview of the case and initial facts. (Para 1 , 2)
2. ownership rights over property and unauthorized constructions. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7)
3. objections to proceedings in writ court versus civil court. (Para 8 , 9 , 10)
4. writ court's ruling on unauthorized construction. (Para 11 , 12)
5. the importance of consent in property modifications. (Para 14 , 15 , 16)
6. effects of mutation and modifications in property rights. (Para 17 , 18)
7. legal interpretation regarding municipal actions and permissions. (Para 19 , 20 , 21)
8. final determination and reaffirmation of previous judgments. (Para 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26)
9. final verdict on the appeals. (Para 27)

JUDGMENT :

Rai Chattopadhyay, J.

1. The three appeals have arisen assailing a judgment and order of a learned Single Bench, dated December 15, 2016. Those are numbered as APO 45 of 2017, APO 46 of 2017 and APO 47 of 2017, respectively. All the three, as above have been heard analogously. Those are being disposed of by dint of this common judgment.

2. A writ petition being No. W.P.No.880 of 2011, was filed by two petitioners namely, (i) Larica Inn Private Limited (henceforth referred to as “Larica”) and (ii) Kanu Paul Chowdhury. The respondents, excepting the State respondent, were (i) Sweet Hut Super Construction (henceforth referred to as “Construction”), (ii) Mangaldeep Nursing and Diagnosis Private Limited (Henceforth referred to as “Mangaldeep”), (iii) Dev-ALL Private Limited (henceforth referred to as “Dev-All”).

The said writ petition was disposed of by the Hon’ble Single Bench, vide the impugned judgment dated December 15, 2016 – which is under challenge, in these appeals.

“Dev-ALL” is the appellant in APO No.45 of 2017, whereas “Mangaldeep” is the appellant in APO No.46 of 2017 and “Construction” is the appellant in APO NO.47 of 2017.

3. Before attempting to go into the details of the judgment impugned in this writ petition, the factual background of the case may be mentioned in a nutshell for better understanding of the dispute involved in this case.

“Dev-All” had purchased the property situated at the premises No. 41, B. B. Ganguly Street (henceforth referred to as the “said premises”). A joint venture agreement was entered into by “Dev-All” with the developer, that is, “Construction”, for construction of a multi-storeyed building comprising several flats therein. It was agreed that the respective portions of the constructed new buildings would devolve upon the owner “Dev-All” and the developer, in accordance with their respective shareholding, as agreed upon in the said agreement. A building plan was sanctioned by the Kolkata Municipal Corporation (respondent Corporation and hence forth referred to as such), on May 18, 2005. Hence, one five storeyed building, comprising the basement and four separate storeys there upon, came into being, the respective portions of which duly devolved upon the owner and the developer, in accordance with their respective shareholding. “Larica” had entered into the scene thereafter, upon purchase of a portion of the said building from “Dev-All”. Three conveyance deeds were executed on July 11, 2009. “Larica” had purchased the following portions of the said property, by dint of the said three registered deeds:

i.) 3954 sq.ft. of super built-up area;

ii.) seven car parking space at the basement comprising an area of 1200 sq.ft.;

iii.) the first floor containing a super built-up area of 2754 sq.ft. together with the proportionate share of land;

iv.) 2700 sq.ft. on the second floor of the premises, including an open space, together with the proportionate share of land;

v.) The third floor of the building comprising of an area of 2700 sq.ft. and 50% of the open roof, containing an area of 4773.5 sq.ft., together with the proportionate share of land.

The developer “Construction”, has been a confirming party in all the said three deeds of conveyance.

4. “Larica” has mutated the said property in its name after duly remitting the property ta

        Click Here to Read the rest of this document
        1
        2
        3
        4
        5
        6
        7
        8
        9
        10
        11
        Judicial Analysis

        AI

        SupremeToday Portrait Ad
        supreme today icon
        logo-black

        An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

        Please visit our Training & Support
        Center or Contact Us for assistance

        qr

        Scan Me!

        India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

        For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

        whatsapp-icon Back to top