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
| 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
Nripendra N. Majumdar Vs. N.M. Bardhan and others
V. Nagarajan Vs. SKS Ispat and Power Ltd. & Ors. reported at
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.
An order passed in breach of the principles of natural justice is null and void and non-est in the eye of law.
The approval of the Board of Administrators was a mere formality, and the calculation of retention fees should have been based on the rates prevailing during the financial year 2018-19, as per the bu....
The judgment emphasizes the need for planned development and the importance of obtaining formal permission for construction, highlighting the consequences of unauthorized construction.
Proper service of notice under the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act can be achieved through speed post, satisfying statutory requirements for natural justice.
Section 406 of Kerala Municipality Act reads as Demolition or alteration of building work unlawfully commenced, carried on or completed.
The court upheld the importance of presenting fraud allegations in the correct procedural context, rejecting a petitioner's late claims of fraud due to prior document legitimacy issues and suppressio....
A party must fully disclose related ongoing proceedings in the court to avoid misleading the tribunal, particularly when fraud is alleged.
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.