JUDGMENT :

RAJA BASU CHOWDHURY, J.

1. Affidavit of service filed in Court is taken on record.

2. The instant writ petition has been filed praying for a direction upon the municipality to forthwith demolish and remove the illegal, unauthorized boundary wall erected at the instance of the private respondents without any sanctioned plan and without any authority of law at the premises no.17, Ritchie Road, Police Station-Ballygunge, Kolkata-700 019 (hereinafter referred to as the “said property”).

3. The petitioners claim that the grandfather of the petitioner nos. 1 and 3, namely Late Mukunda Behari Mullick during his lifetime was the sole and absolute owner of a parcel of land measuring about 6 cottahs 8 chittacks 33 sq. ft. more or less together with structures standing thereon being and forming the said property including a vacant portion of land measuring about 3 cottahs more or less situated on the western side thereof. The said Mukunda Behari Mullick during his lifetime after acquiring the said property had constructed a two-storied residential building on the portion of the said land where he resided with his family members till his demise. Prior to his death, the said Mukunda Behari Mullick executed his last Will and Testament dated 7th September, 1966 in respect of the said property and had appointed his eldest son Late Suniti Prasanna Mullick, the father of the petitioner nos. 1 and 3 as the sole executor thereof. Subsequently, upon the demise of the said testator the said Late Suniti Prasanna Mullick in his capacity as executor applied for probate. The probate was granted by the learned District Judge, Alipore, South 24 Parganas, in Original Suit No.11 of 1976. In terms of the aforesaid will the second son of the testator Jyoti Prasanna Mullick and Sati Prasanna Mullick became entitled to the land on the western side of the said property for construction of residential houses. The aforesaid property which was allotted to Jyoti Prasanna Mullick and Sati Prasanna Mullick was renumbered as premises no.17A, Pankaj Mullick Sarani. According to the petitioners, the said Jyoti Prasanna Mullick and Sati Prasanna Mullick did not construct on the said property. According to the petitioners the Late Suniti Prasanna Mullick in his capacity as executor had executed a deed of indenture dated 16th October, 1998 whereby the specific portion of the vacant land comprising 17A, Pankaj Mullick Sarani was demarcated and was vested in favour of the respective legatees being Jyoti Prasanna and Sati Prasanna as aforesaid. According to the petitioners notwithstanding there being stipulation in the indenture dated 16th October, 1998 which expressly restricted alienation and prohibited disposal of the subject property in favor of third parties contrary to the testamentary scheme the private respondent no.9 along with her mother namely one Late Manjula Mullick and Late Aparna Mullick who happens to be the wife of Late Jyoti Prasanna Mullick, in the interregnum had executed an indenture of lease dated 30th April, 1999 thereby transferring their interest in premises no. 17A, Pankaj Mullick Sarani to a third party, namely, G.G. Developers being the respondent no.10 for a period of 99 years. The private respondent no.11 is the assignee of the interest of G.G. Developers.

4. Mr. Chakraborty, learned advocate representing the petitioners has drawn attention of this Court to the deed of assignment including the indenture of lease dated 16th October, 1998 as aforesaid and would contend that Jyoti Prasanna Mullick and Sati Prasanna Mullick and their legal heirs acquired interest to the extent of 3 cottahs more or less of land lying and situated at premises no. 17A Pankaj Mullick Sarani together with one brick built room having area of 3 sq ft. forming western part of 17 Ritchie Road, Kolkata-700 019 which has been renumbered as premises no.17A Pankaj Mullick Sarani, butted and bounded by the boundary walls on its north, south and west excepting the water reser