AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Arindam Sinha, J
This writ petition has been listed under heading ‘To Be Mentioned’ pursuant to earlier direction by order dated 17th February, 2020. Text of the
order is reproduced below: -
This writ petition has been listed under heading “To Be Mentioned†upon it having been transferred from the Original Side. Parties have
appeared.
Mr. Tapas Dutta, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner and submits, a fabricated sanction plan has since been disclosed by the
Corporation. Most of the building is unauthorised construction as it was sanctioned only for ground+1 floor but there is, at this time, seven-storeys plus
one asbestos shed being eighth-storey. Mr. Rajarshi Dutta, learned advocate appears on behalf of person who claims to occupy approximately 1500
square feet in the building. His client is interested to oppose the writ petition and as such seeks to be added as party. Petitioner will serve a copy to
learned advocate, on approach.
Petitioner has obtained information, based on which he wants to press for orders. Court is inclined to adjourn this petition, at least once, to see if things
can be sorted out.
List under same heading on 24th February, 2020.â€
Parties consent to have this writ petition heard and disposed of at this stage.
Mr. Dutta, refers to paragraphs 10 and 11 of the writ petition as his client’s case for interference. The paragraphs are reproduced below: -
Your petitioner states that upon scrutiny of the said sanctioned plan dated 19-09-1962 it is revealed that those are not the certified to be true copy
of the original as such there is gross anomaly in the issuing process of building plan of the said premises.
Your petitioner states that even if the building plan is authentic/genuine then the construction made in the said premises in respect of 4th , 5th , 6th ,
and 7th floor are unauthorized as there is no sanctioned building plan in respect of the said floor. Since apart, the building is very unsafe and very risk
in involved for life. The high rise building is constructed without following the parameter of National Building Code and structural stability of the said
building is not inconformity of the said code and for the said reason it is very unsafe for the petitioner and other occupants of the said premises and
even the passers-by.â€
Mr. Banerjee, learned advocate appears on behalf of Kolkata Municipal Corporation and submits, subsequent sanction was made for construction of
4th to 7th floors. There is an appeal pending before Building Tribunal, particulars of which he does not have. Mr. Mitra, learned senior advocate
appears on behalf applicant/ Naraolia Financial Advisory Ltd. purchaser of the property in liquidation sale, who wants to be added as party. He
submits, intention of petitioner is mala fide. Petitioner ran his purported case, including unauthorized construction, before National Company Law
Tribunal (NCLT). Having been unsuccessful there, he has sought interference in this way. His client is bona fide purchaser of a portion in the building.
Mr. Dutta, learned advocate appears on behalf of Bhagwati Developers Pvt. Ltd., who claims, is lessee in respect of portion on 6th floor in the
property. He too wants his client to be added as party, who opposes the writ petition. Mr. Mitra’s client and Mr. Dutta’s client are both added
as parties.
Petitioner’s allegation is in paragraph 11. The plan furnished to him is taken as correct, on certification made by the Corporation. Court has not
been shown or it demonstrated that the plan cannot be relied upon. As such, petitioner complains of unauthorized construction in the property, on and
from 4th floor upwards.
Petitioner will approach the Corporation by communicating this order. The Corporation will call for hearing petitioner and private respondents,
including added parties. The Corporation is at liberty to, at first instance, deny hearing to petitioner on a reasoned order made known to him the others.
Otherwise, on hearing the Corporation will decide on the question of unauthorized construction and steps to be taken in that regard. Either rejection of
hearing on reasoned order or commencement of demolition proceedings, must be within four weeks from date of communication of this order. Since
no particulars regarding proceeding pending before Building Tribunal has been tendered to Court, above direction are made and to be complied with.
Petitioner will cause amendment to the cause-title adding Naraolia Financial Advisory Ltd. and Bhagwati Developers Pvt. Ltd. as added respondents.
Amendments be made in Court and counter-signed by Assistant Court Officer.
The writ petition as well as all connected applications are disposed of as above.