Back
2025 Supreme(Cal) 213
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Arindam Mukherjee, J.
Shourya Banerji And Anr. – Petitioners
Versus
The Administrator General And Official Trustee Of West Bengal And Ors. – Respondents
IA No. GA/6 of 2025 In AOT/2 of 2024
Decided On : 17-12-2025
For the Petitioner: Mr. Rohit Banerjee, Adv., Ms. Saloni Bose, Adv., Mr. Sankarsen Sarkar, Adv., Mr. Tanmoy Sett, Adv., Ms. Sucheta Das, Adv.
For the Respondent: Mr. Mainak Bose, Sr. Adv., Mr. Suvadeep Sen, Adv., Mr. Indranil Nandi, Adv., Mr. Sayak Konar, Adv.
The Official Trustee has a duty to ensure sufficient funds are available to the shebaits for fulfilling their obligations under the Ekrarnama, particularly for deva seva and periodic festivals.
Headnote:(A) Official Trustees Act, 1913 - Sections 22, 25, 26 and 28 - Shebaits of Chitra Dassi Trust seeking directions regarding expired lease agreements of properties bequeathed to the deity - Petitioners allege lessees remain in possession despite lease expiry, claiming they are tenants in sufferance - Official Trustee's duty to augment income for deva seva is emphasized. (Paras 2, 10, 16)
(B) Authority of the Official Trustee - The court reiterates that Official Trustee must ensure the shebaits can perform deva seva and periodic festivals, as required by the Ekrarnama. (Paras 15, 19)
Facts of the case:
Petitioners (shebaits) asserted lessees continued to occupy trust properties without paying dues after the lease dates expired in 2024 and 2025, thus compromising the deity's service.
Findings of Court:
Respondents ordered to provide affidavits regarding possession and third-party interests. No further leasing until further orders.
Issues: Whether the lease has expired and the legal status of the lessees thereafter.
Ratio Decidendi: The court affirms lessees must be restricted from further use of the properties after lease expiry, highlighting the Official Trustee's duty to protect the trust's income and functions.
Result: Respondents directed to file affidavits and cease any further leasing activities.
JUDGMENT :
Arindam Mukherjee, J.
1.Affidavit of service filed in Court today is taken on record.
2. This is an application said to be under Sections 22, 25, 26 and 28 of the Official Trustees Act, 1913 preferred by a group of shebaits seeking certain direction regarding the leased out premises belonging to the deity bequeathed under an Ekrarnama dated 25th May, 1820. The trust is known as Chitra Dassi Trust.
3. This application is restricted to premises No. 134/4, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Kolkata – 700007 formerly known as Harrison Road, Premises No. 1A and 1B, Ram Lochan Mallick Street, Kolkata - 700007 (formerly Nos. 20, 20/1, 20/2, 20/3, 20/4, 20/5 and 21 Kashinath Mallick Lane), Premises No.17, 17/1 and 17/1/1, Kashinath Mallick Lane), Kolkata – 700007 and Premises No. 6 Ram Lochan Mallick Street, Kolkata – 700007 which are collectively referred to as the leased properties.
4. The respondent no.2 is the original lessee, respondent nos.3 (a), 3(b), 3(c), 3(d), 3(e), 3(f) are the legal heirs of another original lessee.
5. There are other properties bequeathed to the deity under the Trust, namely, Chitra Dassi Trust created under the Ekrarnama dated 25th May, 1820 (17th Day of Falgun 1228).
6. The respondent nos. 4 and 5 are the lessees in respect of other properties involved in the Trust which are not subject matter of this application but the subject matter of the main application being AOT No.2 of 2024. The respondent nos. 6 to 9 are the other group of shebaits.
7. The petitioners say that under two lease deed respectively dated 23rd September, 1949 the area about 17 Cottahs, 14 Chittacks and 27 sq.ft. were given under lease to the defendant no.2 while another plot measuring 2 Bighas, 11 Cottahs, 13 Chittacks and 5 sq. ft. was given jointly to the defendant nos.2 and 3 under registered Deed of Lease dated 21st January, 1950. These two lease deeds involve the leased properties. The lease deed was executed by the Official Trustee of West Bengal in favour of the respondent no.2 and original respondent no.3 as aforesaid in terms of Ekrarnama to which all the shebaits consented.
8. The first lease dated 23rd September, 1949 expired on 22nd September 2024 while the other lease dated 21st January, 1950 expired on 20th January, 2025. The shebaits say that despite expiry of the lease deed the lessee being the respondent no.2 and legal heirs of the original respondent no.3 continued to hold on to the leasehold properties as also the legal heirs of the original respondent no.3 after his death. They are not paying any money on account of occupational charges. It is also the case of the petitioners that the position of the respondent no.2 and the legal heirs of the original respondent no.3 is that of a tenant in sufferance which is akin to a trespasser. The lease deed provides for a term for the lessee to re-enter on the expiry of the leasehold period.
9. It is the specific case of the petitioners to which the other group of shebaits lent support that the Official Trustee has not taken any steps against the lessee and/or the legal heirs of the original respondent no.3 for some unknown reasons. It is also the case of the petitioners that the income from the properties bequeathed to the deity is in sufficient to perform the regular deva seba and periodic festivals. Despite repeated requests, the Official Trustee has taken no steps for augmentation of income. That the lessees are holding on to the leasehold properties despite objection from the side of shebaits is a glaring example of the acts of the Official Trustee.
10. It is further submitted by the petitioners that to prevent multiplicity of judicial proceedings and further prejudice to the rights of the shebaits, the respondent no.2 and the legal heirs and heiresses of the original respondent no.3, their men, agents and/or servants should be restrained by appropriate order of injunction from not changing the nature and character of the leased properties or create any third party interest in respect
