MR. DEBARATA MISHRA Vs. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.
LAWS(CAL)-2001-8-88
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on August 08,2001

Mr. Debarata Mishra Appellant
VERSUS
The State of West Bengal and Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Delip Kumar Seth, J. - (1.) On 9th June, 1998 the following order was passed by this Court in Writ Petition No. 8746(W) of 1998. "9.6.98. The state respondent concerned is directed to correct the relevant records-of-rights in terms of the judgement decree and order as mentioned in the writ application, within three months from the date of filing the application which is to be made by the petitioner(s) within three weeks from date. In such application the petitioner(s) is/are to annex the copies of the said judgement, decree or order and such application is to be made by registered post with A/D. Till such correction is made, the respondents are restrained from taking possession of and or interfering in any way with the petitioner's possession in the disputed lands and also from settling the same with any other person, if not already settled. If, however, the application is not made within the aforesaid period and also not in the aforesaid manner, this interim order will not be given effect to. The writ application is disposed of as above without any order for costs."
(2.) The petitioner, however, made an application for such correction in terms of the said order, but it was delayed and was not made within the time stipulated. Solely on this ground, that the application was not made within the time, by order dated 12th August, 1999, the application was dismissed and the prayer was rejected.
(3.) Mr. Banerjee, learned Counsel for the State respondent contends that under Section 57B of the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act, such correction could not be done on merit in view of the fact that jurisdiction of the Civil Court is barred by the said provision. Therefore, the said decree does not bind the respondent authority to correct the record of rights. The second contention as raised by Mr. Banerjee is that the petitioner has delayed, and is, therefore, guilty of delay and laches. Inasmuch as the order was passed on 9th June, 1998, the petitioner has come with an application for modification of the order in 2001. Therefore, no relief can be granted on his application. The third contention, that has been raised by Mr. Banerjee. is that in view of the Constitution of the Land Reforms and Tenancy Tribunal under West Bengal Land Reforms and Tenancy Tribunal Act, 1997 with effect 12th August, 1998 this Court ceased to have jurisdiction in the matter.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.