Disposed

Bomkesh Maity v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Calcutta HC29 Sept 2023WPA/21558/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court disposed of a writ petition wherein the petitioner sought relief regarding police protection concerning possession of land. The State submitted that police had complied with the Civil Court's order to protect the petitioner. The court directed authorities to maintain vigil to prevent breach of peace without passing a fresh order.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed; the authorities were directed to maintain vigil to prevent breach of peace.

Bomkesh Maity Vs State of West Bengal and Ors. — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Calcutta HC (2023)

¶1

27 Court no. 14 29.09.2023 D.Hira

¶2

W.P.A. 21558 of 2023

¶3

Byomkesh Maity -versus

¶4

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

¶5

Mr. Rabindranath Mahato, Mr. Aritra Shankar Ray. …For the petitioner

¶6

Mr. Syed A. Ahmed, Mr. A.G. Kar.

¶7

… for the respondent nos. 4 to 8

¶8

Mr. Ansar Mandal, Mr. Md. Idrish. … for the State

¶9

Report filed on behalf of the State is taken on record.

¶10

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits as follows. The petitioner is the owner of the land in question. The private respondents were disturbing his possession of the property. This prompted the petitioner to move the Civil Court. By an order dated 22.06.2023 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Kharagpur, Paschim Medinipur in T.S. Case No. 70 of 2023, the defendant was restrained from dispossessing the plaintiff from the suit property and also for peaceful cultivation work in the same. By an order dated 10.08.2023 learned Civil Court directed the Officer-in-Charge in Narayangarh police station was directed to uphold the sanctity of the interim order passed earlier. The police have given protection to the petitioner for cultivating the land.

¶11

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the private respondents submits as follows. The allegations

¶12

¶13

made in the writ petition are denied. The private respondents are the bargadar in the land in question. They have never tried to dispossess the petitioner from the possession of the suit property.

¶14

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State relies on the report and submits that the police have complied with the order passed by the learned Civil Court. It appears that the petitioner has already obtained an interim injunction restraining the defendant from disturbing their possession and even for cultivating land in question peacefully.

¶15

An order under Section 151 of the C.P.C. was also passed rendering police help.

¶16

Therefore, no further order need be passed in this regard.

¶17

The respondent authorities shall keep a vigil at the locale and ensure that no breach of peace takes place and see to it that no order of a Civil Court is violated.

¶18

With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of.

¶19

Urgent certified photocopy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties expeditiously on compliance of usual legal formalities.

¶20

(Jay Sengupta, J.)

Bomkesh Maity v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bomkesh Maity v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anil Kumar Paul Vs State of West Bengal & Ors.

Abhisek Mondal Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Smt. Kamala Manna and Ors. Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Forida Yeasmin and Ors. Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Chhaya Ghosal Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Faruk Mallick Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.