Dismissed

Md. Janif Mondal v. Niladri Sankar Bhatacharjee and Anr.

Calcutta HC6 Jul 2023CPAN/120/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this contempt application, the petitioner contested the compensation amount paid by the respondents. The Court ruled that compensation disputes require a fresh cause of action and should be litigated separately. Since the contemners complied with previous directions, the application was discharged.

What did the court decide?

The contempt application was disposed of and the contemners were discharged.

Md. Janif Mondal Vs Niladri Sankar Bhatacharjee and Anr. — Contempt of Court | Calcutta HC (2023)

¶1

Form J(2) IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Appellate Side

¶2

Present :

¶3

The Hon’ble Justice Bibek Chaudhuri

CPAN/120/2021

Md. Janif Mondal

Vs.

Niladri Sankar Bhattacharjee & Anr. In

WPA 5994 of 2020

Md. Janif Mondal

Vs.

State of West Bengal & Ors.

¶12

For the petitioner	: Md. Sarwar Jahan, Mr. Shahzad Noor Thander
For the State	: Mr. Samrat Sen, Mrs. Amrita Panja Moulick
Judgement on	: 06.07.2023.

¶13

Bibek Chaudhuri, J.

¶14

The instant application for contempt has been filed by the petitioner against the contemners. On the last occasion the learned Advocate for the contemners has filed a report stating, inter alia , that the respondent No.7/principal contemner has duly complied with the order of this Court by calculating and paying compensation amount to the petitioner. She also submits that in view of such compliance, the contempt application may be dropped and the contemners may be discharged.

¶15

¶16

Learned Advocate for the petitioner, on the other hand, has disputed on the amount of compensation paid to the petitioner. It is submitted by him that against acquisition of his land, amount of compensation has been calculated at Rs.15 lacks but in respect of other land having almost same area, compensation has been settled at Rs.43 lacks. Therefore, the petitioner is at a fix as to what is the basis of calculation of the amount of compensation.

¶17

This Court is of the view that the dispute that has been raised by the learned Advocate for the petitioner at this stage cannot be decided in a contempt proceeding. If the petitioner has any dispute with regard to the quantum of compensation, this will have a fresh cause of action for which the petitioner will have to file an appropriate application before the competent Court having jurisdiction.

¶18

The petitioner craves leave of this Court to file such writ petition.

¶19

If a fresh cause of action accrues in favour of the petitioner, he is always at liberty to file an appropriate application and for this reason, no leave of the Court is necessary.

¶20

Since the contemners have already complied with the directions passed in the instant writ petition, the contempt application is disposed of on full satisfaction and the contemners are discharged.

¶21

(Bibek Chaudhuri, J.)

¶22

Mithun De. A.R. (Ct). Sl No.01.

Md. Janif Mondal v. Niladri Sankar Bhatacharjee and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md. Janif Mondal v. Niladri Sankar Bhatacharjee and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kanu Charan Manna Vs State

Kanu Charan Manna Vs State of West Bengal & Ors.

Basanta Kumar Bhunia & Ors. Vs State of West Bengal & Ors.

M/S Dutta & Mallick Miness Vs State of West Bengal

Srikanta Das & Anr. Vs Union of India & Ors.

Tuhin Mukherjee Vs State of West Bengal & Ors.