Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)

(Pijus @ Pijush Kana Giri vs The State Of West Bengal on 1 March, 2016

Author: Dipankar Datta

Bench: Dipankar Datta

                                     1


    7
01.03.2016
   rrc
                                W. P. 3190 (W) of 2016
               (Pijus @ Pijush Kana Giri Vs. The State of West Bengal
                                       & Ors.)

                Mr. Biswaroop Bhattacharya
                Ms. Tannistha Bandyopadhyay
                                           ......For the petitioner

                Mr. Naren Ghosh Dastidar
                                              ......For the State

                Mr. Mukteswar Maity
                                              ......For the respdt. no. 6


                 An appellate order dated 8th January, 2016 under Section

             16(1) of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior

             Citizens Act, 2007 passed by the District Magistrate, Purba

             Medinipur, being the appellate tribunal, is under challenge in

             this writ petition. The appeal had been presented by the

             petitioner against an order dated 3rd August, 2015 passed by the

             maintenance tribunal refusing to accept her claim to declare a

             deed of gift void under Section 23 of the Act.

                 It appears from the appellate order that the petitioner has

             instituted a civil suit (T.S. No. 333/2014) in the Court of the 1st

             Civil Judge, Jr. Division at Contai for cancellation of a deed of

             gift by which the property in dispute was transferred in favour of

             the private respondents. One of the grounds for dismissal of the

appeal was the pendency of such suit.

It has been contended by Mr. Bhattacharya, learned advocate for the petitioner that there has been fraud in execution of the deed of gift. If at all such point has been raised in the suit, the trial Court shall be entitled to decide the same in accordance with law.

Apparently, the order of the district magistrate does not suffer from any infirmity. The writ petition stands dismissed, without any order as to costs.

However, it is made clear that this order shall not preclude the petitioner to raise all points that are available to her in law, even by amending the plaint in the suit and if such course of action is adopted, the trial court shall proceed to decide the lis between the parties uninfluenced by any observation made by the tribunals under the Act.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties as expeditiously as possible.

( Dipankar Datta, J. )