Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Calcutta High Court

& Anr vs The Kolkata Municipal Corporation & Ors on 8 July, 2013

Author: Jyotirmay Bhattacharya

Bench: Jyotirmay Bhattacharya

                             ORDER SHEET

                         WP No. 596 of 2013

                   IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

                  Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction

                            ORIGINAL SIDE


              SHREE DIDOO MAHESWARI PANCHAYAT VIDYALAY
                               & ANR.
                               Versus
             THE KOLKATA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION   & ORS.



   BEFORE:

   The Hon'ble JUSTICE JYOTIRMAY BHATTACHARYA

   Date : 8th July, 2013.
                                                                  Appearance :
                                                      Ms. Santi Das, advocate.
                                                      Mr.Shubha Dey, Advocate.
                                                          ... for the petitioner
                                              Mr. Achintya Banerjee, Advocate.
                                               Mr. Debangshu Mondal, Advocate.
                                                                 ... for the KMC
                                                 Mr. Sisir Bhowmick, Advocate.
                                                      Mr. Tapan Sil, Advocate.
                                                       ... for the respdt. no.5.




      The Court : The private respondent claims that he had been

carrying on his business of selling books under the name and style of "Alok Bharati" from a portion of the school premises after obtaining trade licence from the Municipal Authority. Lastly, such trade licence was renewed on 12th July, 2012. Legality of such renewal of the trade licence is under challenge in this writ petition at the instance of the school authority. Admittedly, the 2 private respondent has filed a suit, being Title Suit No. 1276 of 2012, before the learned 12th Bench, City Civil Court at Calcutta, inter alia, praying for a declaration of his tenancy right in respect of one shop room in the west side of the ground floor of the school building and for recovery of possession of the said shop room from the school authority. The private respondent admitted in his plaint that he was dispossessed from the said shop room on 3rd July, 2012. Thus, when it is an admitted position that the private respondent is not in possession of the said shop room since 3rd July, 2012 and he cannot even carry on any business from the said premises until the possession is recovered in due process of law, the Municipal Authority ought not to have renewed the trade licence in favour of the private respondent. Mr. Banerjee, learned Advocate appearing for the Municipal Authority, submits that dispossession of the private respondent from the said premises was not brought to the notice of the Municipal Authority at the time of grant of such renewal of trade licence in his favour.

Thus, this Court disposes of the writ petition with this observation that the trade licence which was renewed in favour of the private respondent on 12th July, 2012 for enabling the private respondent to carry on any business from the premises in question will remain suspended until the possession thereof is recovered by the private respondent through due process of law. 3

The writ petition is, thus, disposed of.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties subject to compliance of all requisite formalities.

( JYOTIRMAY BHATTACHARYA, J.) rnc.