TAPABRATA CHAKRABORTY,J. - (1.) This is yet another family dispute between the mother and her son. The father-in-law, the mother-in-law and the sister-in-law of the petitioner's son have also been impleaded in the present writ petition.
(2.) The learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that she is an aged lady of 64 years and she is the owner of the plot of land detailed in paragraph 4 of the writ petition and of the two storied building constructed upon the said plot of land. The said building is G+1. In the ground floor there are two rooms and one of the same is being occupied by the petitioner. The first floor of the said building is being occupied by the respondent nos. 5 to 8. Since 2012 the said respondents were creating disturbances and were not allowing the petitioner to reside in the said property peacefully. The husband of the petitioner expired on 2nd July, 2016 and thereafter the disturbances created by the private respondents aggravated. On 28th July, 2017 the petitioner was forcibly ousted from the room in the ground floor of the said building. Such fact was brought to the notice of the police authorities by lodging a complaint. However, no steps were taken and she lodged a further complaint on 4th January, 2018 but in vain. Aggrieved thereby the petitioner approached this Court.
(3.) The learned advocate appearing for the private respondent nos. 5 to 8 denies the contention of the petitioner and submits that the said respondents have not created any disturbance and the allegation that the petitioner has been forcibly ousted from the said property is absolutely unfounded.;