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

2025 Supreme(Cal) 901

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.
Sri Bapi Chakraborty – Petitioner
Versus
The Municipal Commissioner, Kolkata Municipal Corporation & Ors. – Respondents
C.O. 3353 of 2025
Decided On : 12-09-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Abhratosh Majumdar, Sr. Adv., Mr. Tanmoy Mukherjee, Mr. Chandrachur Chatterjee, Mr. Tanmoy Seth, Ms. Rubab Fatma
For the Respondent: Mr. Alok Kumar Ghosh, Mr. Gopal Chandra Das, Mr. Shourjyo Mukherjee, Mr. Vishrarup Acharyya

An order affecting a person's rights is effective only when communicated, starting the limitation period from that date, not the date of the order itself.

Headnote:(A) Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980 - Sections 400, 400(1), and 400(3) - Limitation Act, 1963 - Application under Article 227 - Condonation of delay rejected by Municipal Building Tribunal; petitioner argued order must be communicated to be effective. Court held limitation commences upon approval of order, thus no necessity for delay application. (Paras 1-26)

(B) Legal Principle - An order affecting rights must be effectively communicated for it to be enforceable. (Paras 17-19)

Facts of the case:
This case involves an application under Article 227 against the order rejecting an appeal for condonation of delay regarding a demolition order. The petitioner, aware of the proceedings, claimed that communication of the order was not done, thus questioning the effective date. (Paras 2-4)

Findings of Court:
The order of the Special Officer was not enforceable until approved by the Mayor-in-Council. Court found the appeal was filed before such approval and therefore justified in overriding the delay rejection. (Paras 20-24)

Issues: Did the delay in filing the appeal arise from a valid lack of knowledge about the order’s enforceability? (Para 20)

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the limitation period under Section 400(3) starts once the order is communicated effectively to the affected party. (Para 19)

Result: The order rejecting the application for condonation of delay was set aside; the appeal was restored for consideration. (Paras 24-26)

Table of Content
1. petition challenging municipal tribunal order (Para 1 , 2)
2. demolition proceedings and appeal process (Para 3 , 4)
3. arguments regarding delay and awareness (Para 5 , 6 , 7)
4. approval required for enforceability of orders (Para 9 , 10 , 12 , 13)
5. judicial interpretation on appeal filing (Para 14 , 16)
6. communication of orders to aggrieved party (Para 17 , 18)
7. commencement of limitation period for appeals (Para 19 , 20 , 21)
8. distinction in supreme court's case application (Para 22)
9. court's interference in prior tribunal order (Para 23 , 24)
10. instructions for municipal tribunal's further action (Para 25 , 26 , 27)

JUDGMENT :

Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.

1. This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is at the instance of person responsible and is directed against the order being no. 18 dated August 27, 2025 passed by the Municipal Building Tribunal, Kolkata Municipal Corporation in Appeal No. 113 of 2024.

2. y the order impugned the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act stood rejected with cost of Rs. 15,000/- to be deposited by the petitioner within the time limit indicated in the said order.

3. A proceeding under Section 400 /400(1) and 416 of Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980 in respect of premises no. 92/1, Dr. Daudar Rahman Road within Ward no. 89 under Borough - X being Demolition Case No. 59-D/Br-X/21-22 was initiated against Dulal Chakraborty and others. The Special Officer (Building), Kolkata Municipal Corporation passed an order dated December 5, 2022 directing demolition of all walls shown in red colour at parking space within the time limit indicated in the said order. The change of use of first floor was allowed to be retained on payment of fees under (1) and 416 of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act within the time limit indicated in the said order and demand notice was directed to be issued to the respective person responsible for first floor changes. The opposite party nos. 5, 6 and 7 filed the writ petition before this Hon’ble Court being WPA 5225 of 2024 seeking implementation of the order dated December 5, 2022 passed by the Special Officer (Building). The said writ petition was disposed of by an order dated May 1, 2024 by directing the Executing Engineer (Civil), Borough –X, Kolkata Municipal Corporation to take steps for implementation of the order of the Special Officer Building provided the same is not stayed/set aside/modified by any court of competent jurisdiction. Challenging the order dated May 1, 2024 passed in WPA 5225 of 2024, the petitioner filed a intra court appeal being MAT 1941 of 2024.

4. By an order dated November 11, 2024 the Hon’ble Division Bench permitted the petitioner to file an appeal on the basis of the copy of the order which was annexed to the writ petition. Pursuant to the said order the petitioner preferred the appeal being Appeal No. 113 of 2024 before the Municipal Building Tribunal, Kolkata Municipal Corporation. The said appeal was filed on November 11, 2024. The said appeal was accompanied by an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act praying for condonation of delay. The Municipal Tribunal, Kolkata Municipal Corporation, by the order impugned, rejected the application under of the Limitation Act with cost of Rs. 15,000/-. Being aggrieved by such order, the appellant before the Municipal Building Tribunal approached this Court by filing the instant application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

5. Mr. Majumdar, learned Senior advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the Hon’ble Division Bench permitted the petitioner to file an appeal with the copy of the order passed by the Special Officer Building which was annexed to the writ petition. He further submits that since the said appeal was filed immediately after the order passed by the Hon’ble Division Bench and pursuant to the permission granted by the Hon’ble Division Bench, the Municipal Building Tribunal ought not to have

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