Calcutta High Court
Asok Kumar Roy vs Union Of India on 21 July, 2016
Author: Soumen Sen
Bench: Soumen Sen
ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction
ORIGINAL SIDE
AP No.61 of 2016
ASOK KUMAR ROY
Versus
UNION OF INDIA
AND
AP No.62 of 2016
ASOK KUMAR ROY
Versus
UNION OF INDIA
BEFORE:
The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN
Date : 21st July, 2016.
Appearance:
Mr. Aritra Basu, Adv.
Ms. Aparna Banerjee, Adv.
The Court : The petitioner was evicted from the godowns apparently due to failure
on the part of the petitioner to pay the rent at the enhanced rate inasmuch as it is an
admitted position that the agreement under which the petitioner was occupying the
premises in question has expired in the year 2001 and there has been no renewal of the
said agreement. However, the petitioner continued to pay the occupation charges. The
petitioner was evicted on 7th August, 2016 after issuing a notice dated 5th August, 2014.
The Railway Authorities have referred to an order passed by a Coordinate Bench
in a writ petition filed by the petitioner in which the Coordinate Bench has observed that
the pendency of the writ petition would not stand in the way of the respondent
authorities taking appropriate steps against the petitioner in accordance with law. The Railway Authorities would rely upon Section 147 of the Railways Act to take possession 2 of the godowns due to failure on the part of the petitioner to pay the enhanced rate. This application for interim relief was filed almost after one and half years. The petitioner issued a notice under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act only on 19th January, 2016.
Pursuant to the earlier observations, the Railway Authorities have produced before this Court a calculation sheet showing that a sum in excess of Rs.1 crore is due and payable on account of arrear rentals at the enhanced rate. In the event, the petitioner deposits a sum of Rs.60 lakhs with the Railway Authorities within a period of three weeks from date, the Railway Authorities shall restore possession of the godowns in question to the petitioner without prejudice and subject to the result of the arbitration proceedings.
The Railway Authorities shall accept the said amount without prejudice to their rights and contentions that the Railway Authorities are entitled to a sum in excess of Rs.1 crore.
The Divisional Railway Manager, Sealdah, shall appoint an Arbitrator within a period of one week from date, failing which the petitioner shall be entitled to apply for appointment of a sole Arbitrator by invoking Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The Arbitrator shall dispose of the reference within eight months from the date of lodging of the statement of claim.
It is, however, needless to mention that in the event the said amount is not deposited, there will be no requirement on the part of the Railways Authorities to restore possession and the Railway Authorities shall be entitled to deal with and/or dispose of the said godowns.
The applications are, accordingly, disposed of.
(SOUMEN SEN, J.) B.Pal 3