Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Vvf (India) Limited vs The Kolkata Municipal Corporation & Ors on 21 April, 2023
Author: Amrita Sinha
Bench: Amrita Sinha
189 sandip Ct. 24 21.04.2023
W.P.A. 11820 of 2021 I.A. No : CAN 2 of 2022 VVF (India) Limited Vs. The Kolkata Municipal Corporation & Ors. Mr. Sayan Sinha ... For the petitioner. Mr. Srijan Nayak, Mrs. Tanushree Dasgupta ... For the KMC. The property in dispute was recorded in the name of Calcutta Chemical Company Limited as owner. Property tax receipts issued by the Corporation till the year 2014-2015 records the name of the said Calcutta Chemical Company Limited as owner. All on a sudden in 2016 the name of the owner gets changed to the Kolkata Municipal Corporation and the Calcutta Chemical Company Limited has been recorded as an occupier of the said property. The petitioner claims title from the said Calcutta Chemical Company Limited.
The petitioner claims that the Calcutta Chemical Company Limited was renamed as Henkel India Limited and the same was incorporated in the records of the Registrar of Companies. The said Henkel India Limited executed a deed of sale in favour of the petitioner on 21st December, 2009. An application for mutation was filed by the petitioner in 2014. The petitioner claims to have paid 2 arrear taxes in the name of the erstwhile owner i.e. Calcutta Chemical Company Limited. The Kolkata Municipal Corporation incorporated its name as owner of the subject property. There is nothing on record to suggest the ownership of the Corporation in respect of the subject property. The affidavit-in-opposition filed by the Corporation speaks about the brochure and the properties mentioned in the list of inventory maintained by the Kolkata Municipal Corporation.
The Court is not convinced by the submission made on behalf of the Corporation that the property is in safe hands and till the petitioner is able to show its title, the property may be recorded in the name of the Corporation.
As the Corporation had issued tax receipts in the name of the erstwhile owner of the property and thereafter incorporated its own name in the records, it was incumbent for the Corporation to afford an opportunity of hearing to the necessary parties. The Corporation is accordingly directed to produce documents in support of title of the property claiming itself as owner of the same.
List the matter once again on 17th May, 2023 marked "For Orders".
Original affidavit-in-opposition is not on record. A copy of the same has been handed over by the learned advocate representing the petitioner. Let the same be 3 kept with the records to be returned as soon as the original affidavit-in-opposition is filed in Court. Affidavit-in-reply filed by the petitioner be taken on record.
As the matter is being considered by the Court and date has been fixed for further hearing, accordingly, there is no requirement to passing any further order in the interim application being I.A. No: CAN 2 of 2022 filed by the petitioner. The application stands disposed of.
(Amrita Sinha, J.)