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 1]

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)

Dipsikha Banerjee vs State Of West Bengal & Others on 18 February, 2011

Author: Soumitra Pal

Bench: Soumitra Pal

                                       1


18.2.2011.                     W.P. 1796 (W) of 2011


                                 Dipsikha Banerjee
                                         Vs
                           State of West Bengal & Others



                  Mr. Subhashish Saha.
                                 ... For Petitioner
                  Mr. Ashok Sarkar,
                  Mr. Monotosh Chakraborty.
                                 ... For State


                  Let affidavit of service filed in Court today be kept with
             the record.


                  In the writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a
             direction upon the respondents particularly on the Land

Manager, O.S.D. & Ex-Officio Deputy Secretary to the Government of West Bengal, the respondent no. 4 to mutate the name of the petitioner in place and stead of Sunil Kumar Das, the lessee, who had expired, in respect of Plot No. AH- 272, Sector-II, Salt Lake City, Kolkata 700091 since the probate has been granted on 12th April, 2010 by the Court of the learned District Delegate, North 24 Parganas, Barasat in Misc. Case No. 134 of 2008 (Probate). Submission has been made that though representations dated 16th September, 2010 and 24th February, 2010 were furnished before the respondent no. 4, 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 the case, the writ 2 petition is disposed of by directing the respondent no. 4 to dispose of the representations dated 16th September, 2010 and 24th December, 2010 by passing a reasoned order to be communicated to the petitioner within eight weeks from the date of communication of this order after giving an opportunity of hearing and after verifying the records.

It is made 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.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the learned advocates for the parties on priority basis.

(SOUMITRA PAL, J )