IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that valuation reports must adhere to specified methods and timelines, reinforcing the importance of compliance with judicial directives in property disputes.

JUDGMENT :

Prasenjit Biswas, J.

1. The instant revisional application is directed against the impugned order dated July 24, 2023 passed by the Learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Diamond Harbour, South 24 Parganas in connection with Title Suit No. 132 of 1996.

2. By passing the impugned order learned Trial Court declined to accept the valuation report as submitted by the ADSR Ghateswar and directed the District Collector to submit fresh valuation in respect of the suit property in terms of the order of this Court passed in connection with C.O. No. 686 dated 06.05.2015. The District Collector was further directed to submit such valuation which should be assessed by applying transparent and cogent method of assessing valuation of the suit land as on 05.05.2001 and if necessary by comparing with other title deeds of the relevant period in respect of land of the suit Mouza and by causing inspection of the suit property by any competent officer under him.

3. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned order passed by the learned Trial Court the instant revisional application has been filed at the behest of the present petitioner/defendant no. 2.

4. The plaintiffs/opposite parties nos. 1 to 7 (herein) instituted a suit for partition being Title Suit No. 132 of 1996 against the other co-sharers before the Civil court which was decreed in preliminary form. By the said decree the plaintiffs/opposite parties Nos. 1 to 7 (herein) were declared to be the owners of the suit property to the extent of 36 decimals of land. On 05.05.2001 an application was taken out on behalf of the present petitioner seeking to preempt the share of the stranger purchaser and under takes to buy the same at the market price. The learned Trial Court allowed the said petition filed by the petitioner by passing the order dated 03.09.2008 holding interalia giving permission to the petitioner (herein)/ defendant no. 2 to buy up the shares of the plaintiffs in the suit property. Plaintiffs are further directed to transfer their shares to the suit property in favour of the defendant no. 2 at a price to be settled between the parties within one month of passing of the said order and failing which defendant no. 2 will be at liberty to take steps for obtaining valuation of the suit property measuring 36 decimals of land from the Collector, South 24 Parganas. A requisition was sent to the Collector, South 24 Parganas for sending the valuation statement in respect of the portion of the stranger purchaser and in reply to that the Collector submitted the report as to the market value of the property indicating the value at Rs. 10,37,569/-. But astonishingly the said report submitted by the Collector is silent as to whether such market value has been ascertained on the date of the said memo or on the date when the petitioner applied to purchase the share of the stranger purchaser before the Trial Court.

5. Being aggrieved with the said valuation report submitted by the Collector, South 24 Parganas the present petitioner filed an application before the learned Trial Court praying interalia for giving direction upon the Collector, South 24 Parganas to assess the market value of the share of the stranger purchaser as on 05.05.2001 as the Collector made the valuation of the subject property according to present market value. The learned Trial Court rejected the petition filed by the present petitioner and accepted the said valuation report as submitted by the Collector, South 24 Parganas by passing an order dated January 3, 2015.

6. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the said order dated January 3, 2015 passed by the learned Trial Court the present petitioner filed a revisional application being C.O. No. 686 of 2015 before this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The said revisional application was disposed of by this Court directing the Trial Court to issue a fresh memo to the Collector, South 24 Parganas with a specific direction that the market value