Debangsu Basak, J. - (1.) A reasoned order dated June 8, 2011 is under challenge in the present writ petition.
(2.) By the impugned order, the petitioner has been found to be a purchaser of a land, from a person who had no title with regard there to.
(3.) Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that, the petitioner is presently a widow. She had purchased the immovable property on good faith from the vendor. He points out that, the immovable property concerned was given on lease by the State Government to the original allottee. The original allottee had paid the entire consideration for the allotment and was put into possession by the State. The original allottee had possessed such property till 2004 when he decided to sell the same to the petitioner. The petitioner had purchased the same bona fide, for valuable consideration, without any notice of any infraction by the original allottee. Moreover, there was no infraction of the original allottee as the State had received rent from the lease agreement by original allottee subsequent to the termination of the lease. Therefore, the State cannot contend that, the lease stood terminated before the conveyance was executed. He relies upon (Jasbir Kaur Vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh & Ors., 1999 9 SCC 22), and unreported order of the Division Bench dated April 24, 2012 passed in F.M.A. No.578 of 2011, C.A.N. No. 1942 of 2011 (Somenath Biswas & Anr. Vs. The State of West Bengal & Anr.) and submits that, the petitioner is ready and willing to pay the defaulted amounts, if there be any. Assuming that, there is a termination of the lease, the same can be revived upon payment of the outstanding, if there be any. The petitioner should be afforded one opportunity to do so.;