Allowed

Hrikesh Safui v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Calcutta HC7 Feb 2024WPA/1977/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of a writ petition directed at a District Registrar. It ordered the Registrar to rectify an erroneously recorded date on a registered deed by scrutinizing the original document submitted by the petitioner, including an opportunity for hearing within three weeks.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to file affidavit. District Registrar, South 24 Parganas directed to scrutinize the deed actually presented and rectify the erroneous date in its records, giving opportunity of hea

Hrikesh Safui Vs State of West Bengal and Ors. — Writ and Judicial Review | Calcutta HC (2024)

¶1

AD-06 Ct No.09 07.02.2024 TN

WPA No. 1977 of 2023

Hrikesh Safui

Vs.

The State of West Bengal and others

¶6

Mr. Lakshminath Bhattacharya

¶7

…. for the petitioner

¶8

Mr. Srijan Nayak, Mrs. Rituparna Maitra, Mr. Arindam Mitra

¶9

…. for the State

¶10

1. In view of the innocuous prayer made in the writ petition, further service is not directed. The petitioner and the State are represented through counsel. Affidavit-of-service filed today be kept on record.

¶11

2. The petitioner presented for registration a deed executed on July 17, 2014 which is annexed to the writ petition. However, in the records of the registering authority, the date of the deed was erroneously recorded as July 17, 2015 instead of July 17, 2014. When the petitioner made representations for rectification of such error in the records of the Registrar, the same was not heeded by the said authorities.

¶12

3. The petitioner has a point in that the registering authorities are required to look into the representation of the petitioner and carry out the

¶13

¶14

rectification on the basis of the deed actually presented by the petitioner.

¶15

4. Hence, WPA No. 1977 of 2023 is disposed of by directing the respondent no.5, that is, the District Registrar, South 24 Parganas to consider the representation of the petitioner annexed to the writ petition and carry out the necessary rectification in its records by scrutinizing the deed actually presented for registration by the petitioner.

¶16

5. Such exercise shall be concluded, if necessary upon giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, latest within three weeks from the date of communication of this order to the respondent no.5.

¶17

6. The respondent no.5 shall act on a server copy of this order for the purpose of compliance.

¶18

7. There will be no order as to costs.

¶19

8. Urgent photostat certified copies of this order, if applied for, be made available to the parties upon compliance with the requisite formalities.

¶20

(Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J.)

Hrikesh Safui v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hrikesh Safui 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

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Merlin Projects Limited and Anr. Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Rehana Begum & Ors. Vs Allahabad Bank & Ors.

Tuhina Khatun Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Prasanta Mutt Vs the Punjab National Bank and Ors.

Tapas Rakshit Vs West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Company Limited and Ors.

M/S Asha Medical and Anr. Vs West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Company Limited and Ors.