Disposed¶10

Arpon Chakraborty v. Bhakti Bhusan Sarkar and Ors.

Calcutta HC17 Mar 2026APOT/29/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Leave to appeal; appeal disposed; Calcutta High Court Original Side; demolition order; Kolkata Municipal Corporation (KMC); WPO 846 of 2025; IA GA 1 of 2026; order dated January 27, 2026; merits of demolition order not examined; remedy before appropriate forum; Bhakti Bhusan Sarkar; Shampa Sarkar, J.; Ajay Kumar Gupta, J.

What did the court decide?

Application for leave to appeal (G.A. 1 of 2026) allowed and appeal disposed of without going into the merits of the demolition order; all parties to make their respective submissions before the appropriate forum against the order of demolition. ¶10

Arpon Chakraborty Vs Bhakti Bhusan Sarkar and Ors. — Calcutta HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

OD 8

¶2

ORDER SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE

¶3

BHAKTI BHUSAN SARKAR AND ORS

¶4

BEFORE:

¶5

The Hon'ble JUSTICE SHAMPA SARKAR The Hon’ble JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR GUPTA Date: 17^th March, 2026.

¶6

Appearance: Mr. Sauvik Nandy, Sr. Adv. Mr. Dyutimoy Paul, Adv. . . .for the applicant Mr. Srikanta Dutta, Adv. Mrs. Rituparna Sarkar Dutta, Adv. …for respondent no. 1 Mr.Alak Kumar Ghosh, Adv. Mr. Gopal Chandra Das, Adv. . . .for KMC

¶7

The Court: IA GA 1 of 2026 is an application for leave to appeal from the judgment and order dated January 27, 2026 passed by the learned Single Judge in WPO 846 of 2025. The order was passed in the absence of the appellant and a direction was passed upon the corporation to act and proceed in accordance with law on the basis of the demolition order. As the demolition order pertains to the applicant’s premises, we allow the application for leave to appeal. G.A 1 of 2026 is allowed.

¶8

¶9

We now proceed to deal with the appeal. Learned Single Judge was of the view that the Municipal Authorities must take appropriate steps for implementation of their own order in accordance with law and preferably within four weeks. The writ petition was filed by respondent no. 1 alleging that Kolkata Municipal Corporation had failed and neglected to carry out its own order of demolition of the premises in question. Learned Single Judge did not express any opinion on the merits of the order of demolition, apart from directing the Corporation to act and proceed in accordance with law. The main order of demolition has been challenged by the appellant by filing a writ petition, which is pending.

¶10

Under such circumstances, the remedy of the appellant is before the appropriate forum against the order of demolition. We are not inclined to go into the merit of the order of demolition as the same was not the subject matter of the writ petition. The appeal is accordingly disposed of.

¶11

All the parties shall make their respective submissions before the appropriate forum.

¶12

(SHAMPA SARKAR, J.)

¶13

(AJAY KUMAR GUPTA, J.)

¶14

TR/

Arpon Chakraborty v. Bhakti Bhusan Sarkar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arpon Chakraborty v. Bhakti Bhusan Sarkar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jyotirindra Chattopadhyay Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Bhanwar Lal Jajodia Vs State Bank of India and Ors.

Subrata Goswami Vs the Kamarhati Municipality and Ors.

Arbind Didwania Vs Au Small Finance Bank Limited and Ors.

Binay Choudhary and Ors. Vs Au Small Finance Bank Ltd. and Ors.

Nandita Mandal @ Nabaneeta Mandal, Pradhan Vs the State of West Bengal and Ors.