TAPABRATA CHAKRABORTY, J. - (1.) The present writ petition has been preferred inter alia praying for issuance of necessary direction upon the respondents to allow the petitioner to remove all the movables which are lying inside the flat no.8, National Tower, 23 Loudon Street, Kolkata - 700017 (in short, the said premises).
(2.) Shorn of unnecessary details the facts are that the grandfather of the petitioner, namely, J.S. Lodha obtained a lease in respect of the said premises from Life Insurance Corporation of India (in short, LICI). After the death of J.S. Lodha, the lease in respect of the said premises was transferred in the name of the petitioner's grandmother, namely, Mrs. Sushila Lodha and the petitioner's father, namely, Mr. Rajendra Singh Lodha. On 3rd October, 2008 the petitioner's father expired. In the midst thereof, show cause notices were issued by The Estate Officer under Sections 5 and 7 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 (in short, the PP Act) and in the said proceedings, after the demise of Rajendra Singh Lodha, the petitioner filed an application for substitution. Such prayer for substitution was refused by an order dated 7th December, 2016. Thereafter an order of eviction and recovery of arrears of rent was passed by the Estate Officer on 21st February, 2017. Challenging the said order a writ petition being W.P.No.6453 (W) of 2017 was preferred by Sushila Lodha, being the proforma respondent herein and Harsh Vardhan Lodha. The said writ petition was allowed by a judgment dated 16th March, 2017. Aggrieved thereby, LICI and its Estate Officer preferred an appeal being MAT 554 of 2017. Upon contested hearing the said appeal was allowed by a judgment dated 20th July, 2017 setting aside the judgment and order dated 16th March, 2017 and dismissing the writ petition. On 1st August, 2017, the said premises was locked by the authorities of LICI. Thereafter the proforma respondent herein preferred a statutory appeal under Section 9 of the PP Act being Misc. Appeal No. 49 of 2017 challenging the order of eviction and recovery of arrears of rent passed by the Estate Officer on 21st February, 2017 and by an order dated 6th September, 2017 the prayer for stay of operation of the order dated 21st February, 2017 was refused so far it relates to the order of eviction from the premises and the order for recovery of the arrears and damages to the tune of Rs. 1,39,68,000/- was stayed subject to deposit of Rs. 1,00,000/-. The said amount was, however, not deposited with the Learned Registrar, Civil Court, Calcutta. The petitioner is not a tenant in respect of the said premises and he is presently a permanent resident of Singapore though he had resided in the said premises since his birth till the year 2014. Subsequent to issuance of the order in the statutory appeal, the petitioner issued a demand notice through his learned advocate on 15th September, 2017 asking the authorities to allow him to remove the movables from the said premises but the same was not considered and aggrieved thereby the present writ petition was filed on 18th September, 2017. In connection with the writ petition an application being G.A. 2992 of 2018 has been filed by the petitioner on 19th October, 2018 inter alia praying for a direction upon the respondents to grant access to the said premises and to permit him to remove his personal belongings.
(3.) Mr. Shaktinath Mukherjee, learned senior advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the movables which the petitioner wants to remove have been detailed in annexure 'P2' of the writ petition. The said movables are not fittings affixed to the said premises, being the flat in question and are neither part of the same nor are for more beneficial enjoyment of the same and the authorities have no right to dispose of the said movables left in the public premises by the occupants. In support of such contention he has drawn the attention of this Court to the definitions of premises and public premises in Section 2(c) and in Section 2(e) of the PP Act.;