IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Gaurang Kanth, J.
Magnum Enterprises And Anr. – Petitioners
Versus
The Kolkata Municipal Corporation And Ors. – Respondents
WPO 600 of 2025
Decided On : 14-08-2025
JUDGMENT :
Gaurang Kanth, J.
1.The petitioner in the present writ petition challenges the order dated 06.08.2025 issued by the Executive Engineer (C), Building Department, Borough – VII, Kolkata Municipal Corporation (in short ‘KMC’), whereby it was communicated that, upon expiry of seven days, KMC officials would proceed to implement the Municipal Commissioner’s order dated 10.06.2025. By the said order dated 10.06.2025, the Municipal Commissioner directed the Executive Engineer (C), Building Department, Borough – VII to repair/demolish/secure any such portion of the Western Block (Block – 2) of premises No.11, Abanindra Nath Thakur Sarani, Kolkata in respect of which notice under Section 411 (1) of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980 had been issued, if so required for the safety of public and the inmates of the building, and to do so at the expenses of the owner.
2. This matter has a chequered history, involving multiple rounds of litigation initiated either at the instance of the landlord or tenant in respect of Western Block (Block – 2) of the premises mentioned above.
3. Respondent no. 5 is the landlord of the premises, and the petitioner is one of the tenants thereof. An Ejection Suit No.110/2005-E is pending before the Chief Judge, Presidency Small Causes Court, Calcutta.
4. The respondent Corporation initially issued a notice dated 28.04.2008 under Section 411 (1) of the KMC Act, 1980. The Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court, by an order dated 28.04.2014, in an appeal filed by the landlord (APOT/179/2014) quashed the said notice on the ground that neither the specific dangerous portion of the building was identified, nor a sketch map was annexed with the said notice.
5. Thereafter, the respondent Corporation issued second notice dated 16.06.2014 under Section 411 (1) of the KMC Act, which was also set aside by this Court by its order dated 13.01.2015 in WP No.1271/2014, a writ petition filed by the landlord. The appeal against the said order was also dismissed.
6. On 23.12.2017, the respondent Corporation issued third notice under Section 411 (1) of the KMC Act, and subsequently displayed a board outside the building declaring the same to be a “Dangerous Building”. The petitioner challenged the said notice dated 23.12.2017 in WP No. 435 of 2018. By an order dated 13.09.2018, this Court disposed of the writ petition by granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the respondent Corporation for the purpose of granting permission for repairing the rear building of the said premises, in accordance with law. The Kolkata Municipal Corporation authorities were further directed to consider the application of the petitioner no. 1, in accordance with law. It was also directed that in case the municipal authorities reject the application of the petitioner no. 1 then they were required to give reasons for such rejection.
7. Pursuant to the said order, a joint inspection was carried out on 30.11.2018. Thereafter, by an order dated 26.12.2018, the respondent Corporation rejected the petitioner’s application for renovation and/ or repair of the said building. The petitioner challenged the order in WPO/80/2019. By order dated 04.01.2021, this Court disposed of the writ petition granting liberty to the petitioner to submit a fresh proposal for repair and directing the Corporation to decide and dispose of such application within three weeks of receipt of such proposal.
8. Subsequently, the respondent issued fourth notice dated 26.03.2021 under Section 411 (1) of the KMC Act directing the owner/occupier to repair the repairable portion and demolish the dangerous portion of the building. Thereafter, the petitioner no. 1 also informed the corporation authorities that no repairing or renovation work has been commenced by the landlord in respect of the portion under their occupation. Nevertheless, the petitioner no. 1 carried out the work of restoration and repairing of the western side rear building of the said premises under occupation
The rights of tenants to repair premises under the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act must be upheld, and compliance with court directives is essential in decision-making.
The court established that renovations deemed necessary for safety do not require additional permissions under the KMC Act, provided they comply with existing regulations.
Municipal authorities may exercise emergency powers to ensure public safety, allowing for expedited eviction without a prior hearing in cases of imminent danger.
Letters Patent Appeals - Rent Control and Eviction - Tenant - Restrictions on user of buildings and removal of dangerous buildings - Saving inheritance of High Court - Power conferred under Section 2....
The judgment emphasizes the need for planned development and the importance of obtaining formal permission for construction, highlighting the consequences of unauthorized construction.
The court upheld the legality of amalgamating properties under the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act for tenant rehabilitation, emphasizing adherence to prescribed statutory procedures.
The court affirmed the right of the petitioners to rehabilitate after the demolition, balancing public safety with their occupancy claims as per the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.