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

2026 Supreme(Cal) 443

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA 
AJAY KUMAR GUPTA, J. 
Sanghamitra Ghosh and Anr. – Petitioner 
Versus 
State of West Bengal & Others – Respondent
WPA 19210 of 2021 
Decided On : 14-01-2026 

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Mr. Bidhayak Lahiri, Adv. Mr. Pradip Kumar Ghosh, Adv. Ms. Bhaswati Lahiri, Adv.
For the Respondent: Mr. Satyajit Talukder, Adv. Mr. Arindam Chatterjee, Adv., Mr. Supratim Dhar, Adv. Mr. Amartya Pal, Adv.

Government policies cannot be applied retrospectively to invalidate pre-existing rights or contractual obligations, ensuring fairness and legal certainty.

Headnote:(A) Land Policy of West Bengal, 2012 - Right to property - The court examined the execution of sale deeds and the applicability of governmental policies to prior agreements. The KMDA was found to falsely deny the execution of sale deeds based on a retrospective application of policy. The action of KMDA to mandate a lease deed instead of a sale deed was ruled impermissible as it attempted to affect pre-existing rights of the petitioners. (Paras 44, 50)

Facts of the case:
The petitioners had applied for and paid the full consideration for an apartment, receiving possession in 2008, yet KMDA delayed the execution of the sale deed citing a later policy shift. (Paras 15, 21)

Findings of Court:
The court directed KMDA to execute the sale deed within 12 weeks, stating the governmental policy could not apply retrospectively to unsettle previously established rights. (Paras 50, 51)

Issues: The primary issue was whether the KMDA could retroactively enforce a newer land policy that would prevent the sale of properties to applicants with prior agreements. (Paras 43, 44)

Ratio Decidendi: The court held the retrospective application of the land policy was impermissible and reaffirmed that pre-existing contractual obligations must be honored, emphasizing the principle of legal certainty. (Paras 44, 46)

Result: The writ petition was allowed, and KMDA was directed to execute the sale deed immediately.

Table of Content
1. contractual obligations for property transfer (Para 2 , 13 , 14 , 18)
2. discrimination in sale deed execution (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 9 , 10)
3. respondent's defense based on policy (Para 7 , 8 , 11)
4. inaction by authorities in deed execution (Para 19 , 20 , 21)
5. court's directive for execution of sale deed (Para 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54)

Judgment :

Ajay Kumar Gupta, J.

1. This instant writ petition has been filed by the Petitioners seeking direction upon the respondents and/or their agents, servants, assigns and/or representatives to rescind and/or cancel and/or withdraw the memo no. 191/KMDA/Estate (MM)/Purba/Ph- II/06/FCFS dated 08.03.2020 as Annexure P-8 of the writ petition and further prays for direction upon the respondents and/or representatives to execute the deed of sale of the apartment in favour of the petitioners forthwith.

FACTS OF THE CASE

2. The brief facts, leading to the filing of this writ petition, are as under:

a. The KMDA envisaged a scheme to build a housing complex, namely, Purba housing, at 1582/2, Rajdanga Main Road, Police Station - Kasba, Kolkata - 700 107 consisting of 361 residential apartments in 5 nos of 8-storied buildings, 4 nos of 6-storied buildings, 5 nos of 5-storied buildings and 2 nos of 4-storied buildings, in different blocks, to sell among the aspiring applicants, on outright after payment of full and final consideration amount.

b. The petitioners, having been satisfied with the booklet/brochure issued by the KMDA in the year 2005, made an application within the prescribed time to buy a residential apartment within the project area, and they deposited the application money in terms of the brochure.

c. After being satisfied by the respondent authority in terms of paragraph no. 5 of the brochure allotted an apartment of saleable area of 1113 sq. ft. bearing No. E-5/1 at 6D-II Block provisional premium of apartment amounting to Rs. 17,80,800/- in the name of the petitioners by an office memo vide number 2189/KMDA/MM/PURBA/PH-II/06/FCFZ dated June 26, 2006. The aforesaid provisional amount as per the letter of allotment would have to be paid in 3 instalments.

d. The petitioners paid the consideration amount in full within the specified time and, thereafter, by the memo no. 1408/KMDA/MM/Purba/Ph-II/06/FCFS dated 04.12.2008, the respondent no. 4 issued a Possession Advice. As such, the petitioners are entitled to take possession of the allotted flat. Accordingly, the petitioners were advised to receive the possession advice.

e. By the memo no. 387/ECPO-1/KMDA/645/AD dated 12.12.2008, respondent no. 4, handed over the possession certificate to the petitioners of the flat/apartment no. E-5/1 Block GD Building No. 1 Type II of the Purba Housing Complex at East Kolkata Township, as the petitioners deposited the entire consideration amount of the apartment.

f. In the said possession certificate, in paragraph no. 5, it was clearly stated that KMDA will transfer the apartment on a freehold basis. However, the sale deed will be executed within the allottees after they have obtained membership in the co-operative Housing society or apartment owners' association, duly approved by the competent authority.

g. The deed of transfer shall be executed and registered in the format prescribed by the KMDA. The stamp duty, registration charges and other charges as may be levied by the Government from time to time for registration and/or execution of the deed of transfer shall be payable by the allottee. The petitioners, after possession of the apartment, have been depositing the municipal property taxes.

h. The respondent authority also provisionally allotted semi-covered garage space, with the conditions mentioned in the Brochure for a consideration price of Rs. 1,75,000/- by the memo No. 1812/1/KMDA/MM/Purba/PH-II/06/FCFS dated 05.10.2010. In this respect, the petitioners paid the consideration price in full for the aforementioned garage space, and the respondent authority handed over possession of the garage

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