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 5]

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)

In Re: Bimal Kumar Jhunjhunwala & Ors vs State Of West Bengal & Ors on 14 January, 2011

Author: Soumitra Pal

Bench: Soumitra Pal

.2011
                         W.P. 3398 (W) of 2010

        In re: Bimal Kumar Jhunjhunwala & Ors.
                                           ... Petitioners
                            Vs.
               State of West Bengal & Ors. ... Respondents
        Mr. Tapan Chakraborti          ... for the petitioners

        Mr. Amitava Choudhury           ... for the respondents


In the writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for a direction upon the Land Manager, Bidhannagar, Urban Development, Government of West Bengal, the respondent no.4, to mutate their names in place and stead of Abani Kuamr Podder in respect of Plot No.BH 207, Sector-II, Salt Lake City, Kolkata-700091 as testamentary successors. Submission has been made though it is evident that pursuant to the intimation dated 21st April, 2006 the petitioners had complied with the formalities including depositing the fees, however, no steps have been taken. Submission has been made that though a representation was made on 8th October, 2010 no action has been taken. Aggrieved this writ petition has been filed.

Having heard the learned advocates for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of this case, the writ petition is disposed of by directing the respondent no.4 to dispose of the matter regarding mutation of the plot in question by passing a reasoned order to be communicated to the petitioners within twelve weeks from the date of communication of this order after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner no.1, who shall represent the other petitioners and after verifying the records.

I make it clear that I have not gone into the merits of the case and all points are left open to be dealt with by the respondent no.4.

There will be no order as to costs.

Let urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be furnished to the appearing parties on priority basis.

( Soumitra Pal, J.) 2