AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
I.P. Mukerji, J. - The writ petitioner has raised a serious objection with regard to mutation of the second floor flat of premises no. 19B, Tarak Dutta Road, Ward No. 69, Kolkata-700 019 in favour the of respondent no. 8. By a letter dated 19th July, 2014 to the Municipal Commissioner she claims to be the owner of the flat and in possession thereof. On 19th July, 2014 the mutation was already effected in favour of this respondent.
Both Mr. Saptangshu Basu, learned Senior Advocate joined by Mr. Aloke Ghosh appearing for the private respondent and the Kolkata Municipal Corporation respectively say that no notice is required to be given at the time of mutation and they have acted on the basis of the alleged deed of sale produced by the private respondent.
In my view it may be true that at the time of mutation no notice is required to be given. But if after mutation a serious dispute is raised with regard to the authenticity of a deed of transfer or the right of the person in whose favour a premises is mutated, the authority has an obligation to hear the objection and to reconsider the mutation effected.
In that view of the matter the respondent Corporation will reconsider the mutation of the above flat upon hearing the petitioner and the private respondent and by a reasoned order within two months of communication of this order.
In this type of case where forgery and fraud are alleged the Corporation is entitled to investigate the possession of the flat in question.
After reconsideration if it is found that the mutation has been done wrongly, the mutation will be cancelled and fresh mutation will be given.
All points on merits are kept open.
All the papers are before this Court. Affidavits were not invited. The allegations contained in the writ petition are deemed not to have been admitted.
The writ application is thus disposed of.
Urgent certified photocopy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties on priority basis.