Abdul Rashid vs Calcutta Minicipal Corporation And ... on 28 August, 1990
10. The MCD is not competent to consider or investigate and adjudicate
title to the property and find out the right of a person to occupy the
property with respect to which license is sought. Here, the respondent no.2
being the recorded owner of the property has admitted the possession of
the petitioner no.2 and taken recourse to legal proceedings for eviction of
petitioner no.2. In these circumstances, the respondent no.1 NDMC cannot
refuse grant of license at least to the petitioner no.2. The Indian
jurisprudence respects possession and the petitioner no.2 by reason of
being in admitted possession also would be entitled to the licence. The
same view was also taken by the Division Bench of the Calcutta High
Court in Abdul Rashid Vs. Calcutta Municipal Corporation AIR 1991
Calcutta 234.