A co-owner of joint property with a separate holding number is entitled to municipal water connections as a necessary civic amenity under the West Bengal Municipal Corporation Act, recognizing the right to access potable water as integral to the right to life.

JUDGMENT :

Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, J.

1. In essence, the question that falls for consideration in the present revisional application is whether a water connection can be directed to be granted to a co-owner of a joint property in whose favour a separate holding number has been allotted by the Asansol Municipal Corporation (hereinafter referred to as "the Corporation").

2. The plaintiff/petitioner (hereinafter referred to as "the petitioner") instituted the suit, initially against the Municipal Corporation seeking, inter alia, a decree of declaration that he is the owner of Holding No. 253/26 (hereinafter referred to as "the suit property") and is entitled to have the said premises separately assessed for municipal tax in the Assessment Register of the Corporation, along with a further decree declaring his entitlement to a water connection in accordance with law and a mandatory injunction directing the Corporation to grant a water connection to the suit property, together with other consequential and ancillary reliefs.

3. The specific case sought to be made out in the plaint is that Holding No. 253/23, which is independent of Holding No. 253/24, comprises approximately 3.4 cottahs of land with a hall and an office room (recently renovated) and, at the rear, a substantially demolished structure along with a passage, comprised in Khatian Nos. 11520 to 11527 and Plot Nos. 6984, 6985 and 6986 (hereinafter referred to as "the suit property"), was recorded in the name of the petitioner’s father, namely, Dharani Dhar Malkhandi, since deceased.

4. It is further pleaded that, in or about the year 1964, with the express consent of the petitioner’s father, the petitioner’s mother, namely, Sudharani Malkhani, handed over Holding No. 253/26 to the petitioner for the purpose of operating a saw mill business. Upon the subsequent demise of his father, the petitioner continued in possession of the said holding and has been holding the same as its absolute owner. It is further stated that municipal tax in respect of Holding No. 253/26 has been realised from the petitioner’s share of rent collected from the tenants of Holding No. 253/24.

5. Being in dire need of regular and potable water at the premises standing on Holding No. 253/26, the petitioner approached the Corporation seeking grant of a water connection to the said premises. However, despite such approach, the Corporation failed to take any effective steps to provide the water connection. Such inaction on the part of the Corporation constrained the petitioner to institute the suit, being Title Suit No. 110 of 2023.

6. The record reveals that, along with the plaint, the plaintiff also preferred an application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking an order of ad interim injunction directing the Corporation to grant a water connection to the said holding. However, by an order dated 22nd February, 2023, the petitioner’s prayer for ad interim injunction was rejected.

7. Subsequently, the petitioner filed an application under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, which was disposed of ex parte with the following observations and order:

“Now to entertain the said petition, the present condition of the suit premises and the necessity of water connection had to be established. Moreover, as there is no order or no restraining order or status quo order, it is immaterial to provide any liberty or any direction upon the defendants. Water connection can be availed by anyone if the necessary formalities and permission is sought from the appropriate authority, there is no scope of intervention of court unless the same