Disposed¶23

Sohel Ahammed v. the State of West Bengal and Ors.

Calcutta HC10 Dec 2024WPLRT/149/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

WPLRT 149 of 2024; Sohgel/Sohel Ahammed v. State of West Bengal; extension of interim order staying hearing of Misc/Law/07/2024 before the learned Tribunal until disposal of the OA; West Bengal Estate Acquisition Act 1953 vesting and its reversal by appellate forum; BL&LRO; LR Record of Rights; deed of gift by Nasiruddin Ahammed; multiplicity of proceedings; Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, J. and Tapabrata Chakraborty, J.; order dated 10.12.2024.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition WPLRT 149 of 2024 disposed of: interim order of 14.11.2024 extended until disposal of the original application; parties to exchange affidavits per the Tribunal's time frame; Tribunal requested to dispose of the OA on the returnable date or within four months thereafter; no order as to costs. ¶23

Sohel Ahammed Vs the State of West Bengal and Ors. — Calcutta HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶23

Issue for consideration

Whether the interim order dated 14.11.2024, directing respondent no. 4 not to proceed with the hearing of Misc/Law/07/2024, should be extended until the disposal of the original application pending before the learned Tribunal.

¶21

Court's answer

The interim order passed earlier in this writ petition on 14.11.2024, directing respondent no. 4 not to proceed with the hearing of Misc/Law/07/2024, is extended until the disposal of the original application.

¶21

Ratio / Principle

The parties are directed to exchange their affidavits within the time frame fixed by the learned Tribunal.

¶22

Key takeaways

The learned Tribunal is requested to make a sincere endeavour to dispose of the original application on the returnable date, or as expeditiously as possible, within four (4) months thereafter.ratio¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition (WPLRT 149 of 2024, decided 10.12.2024) disposed of. The interim order dated 14.11.2024, by which respondent no. 4 was restrained from proceeding with the hearing of Tribunal case Misc/Law/07/2024, is extended until the disposal of the original application, the Court holding that giving effect to the appellate authority's order in the meantime may lead to multiplicity of proceedings. Parties directed to exchange affidavits within the time frame fixed by the learned Tribunal, which is requested to dispose of the OA on the returnable date (19.03.2025) or, failing that, expeditiously within four months thereafter. No order as to costs. Underlying dispute: lands declared vested under the West Bengal Estate Acquisition Act, 1953; vesting order set aside by the appellate forum; lands recorded in the name of Nasiruddin Ahammed, who conveyed them by deed of gift to the petitioner Sohel, whose name was recorded in the LR Record of Rights; OA challenges the appellate direction to the BL&LRO to restore the property to its original status.

¶1

18 10.12.2024 Ct. No. 11 rrc

¶2

WPLRT 149 of 2024 (Sohgel Ahammed Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors.)

¶3

Mr. Mrinal Kanti Ghosh ….. For the petitioner

¶4

Mr. Supratim Dhar, Sr. Adv. Ms. Debdooti Dutta

¶5

….. For the State respondents

¶6

Mr. Amit Baran Dash Mr. Jayanta Dey Ms. Ankana Sarkar

¶7

….. For the respondent nos. 5 to 11

¶8

Affidavit-of-service, as filed, be kept on record.

¶9

Mr. Ghosh, learned advocate representing the petitioner submits that by an earlier order dated 14^th November, 2024 this Court directed the respondent no. 4 not to proceed with the hearing of the case being Misc/Law/07/2024 till 15^th December, 2024 or until further orders, whichever is earlier.

¶10

He submits that the said order be extended till the disposal of the original application since the learned Tribunal is in seisin of the entire dispute cropped up in between the parties.

¶11

In response, Mr. Dash, learned advocate representing the writ petitioners/respondent nos. 5 to 11 herein, submits that numerous facts are involved in this matter. He alleges that the lands originally belonged to the predecessor-in-interest of the private respondents and were declared vested in a proceeding initiated under the relevant provisions of the West Bengal Estate Acquisition Act, 1953. However, the vesting order was

¶12

¶13

ultimately set aside by the appellate forum, but the lands were suddenly recorded in the name of the predecessor-in-interest of the writ petitioner, namely, Nasiruddin Ahammed, who, by executing a deed of gift, conveyed the lands in favour of Sohel, the petitioner herein. He submits that, based on this deed, Sohel’s name was recorded in the LR Record of Rights.

¶14

He, further, submits that no prejudice would be caused if, in the meantime, the order of the appellate authority is given effect to and the name of the original owner is recorded in the LR Record of Rights.

¶15

Mr. Dhar, learned senior advocate, appears on behalf of the State respondents. He submits that if the order impugned in the original application (in short, OA) pending before the learned Tribunal is given effect to and entries in the R-O-R are altered at this stage, it may lead to the need for further changes based on the outcome of the proceeding. He suggests that, for now, the B.L. & L.R.O. should refrain from making any alterations to the R-O-R.

¶16

Heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties. Considered the materials placed before us.

¶17

Answering our query Mr. Ghosh submits that the order impugned in the writ petition speaks that the hearing of the OA has been fixed on 19^th March, 2025.

¶18

The OA was preferred challenging the order of the appellate authority whereby the BL&LRO was directed to restore the property in question to its original status.

¶19

Undisputedly, the learned Tribunal is in seisin of the matter. However, if the said order is given effect to in the

¶20

¶21

meantime, it may lead to multiplicity of proceedings and further litigation. Taking note of this, we are of the view that the interim order passed earlier in this writ petition on 14th November 2024, directing respondent no. 4 not to proceed with the hearing of the case Misc/Law/07/2024, should be extended until the disposal of the original application. It is ordered accordingly.

¶22

The parties are directed to exchange their affidavits within the time frame fixed by the learned Tribunal. The learned Tribunal is requested to make a sincere endeavor to dispose of the original application on the returnable date, or as expeditiously as possible, within four (4) months thereafter.

¶23

With the above observations, the writ petition being WPLRT 149 of 2024 is disposed of.

¶24

There shall, however, be no order as to costs.

¶25

All parties shall act on the server copies of this order duly

¶26

downloaded from the official website of this Court.

¶27

(Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, J.) (Tapabrata Chakraborty, J.)

Sohel Ahammed v. the State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sohel Ahammed v. the State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mongla Bhaduli and Anr. Vs the Union of India and Ors.

Sri. Tilak Biswas Vs the State of West Bengal and Ors.

MD Mojibur Rahaman@Mujibar Rahman Vs State of West Bengal & Ors.

Mohan Kumar Halder Vs the State of West Bengal and Ors.

Rita Nath Vs the State of West Bengal and Ors.

Ajoy Kumar Dhar Vs Union of India & Ors.