SOUMEN SEN,J. - (1.) The appeal and the cross objection arising out of an order dated 14th September, 2017 passed by Mr. Justice Harish Tandon in W.P. No. 930 of 2016 by which the acquisition of property of the writ petitioner by invoking Section 352(a) of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980 are considered and disposed of together.
(2.) The property in question originally belonged to the father of one Birinchi Bihari Shah, who executed a deed of settlement during his lifetime, settling the said property in favour of his son Birinchi Bihari Shah, who was then a minor. The land in question comprises a plot of land of more or less 2 bighas 18 kathas 6 chitaks and 40 square feet together with a bungalow and a tank. After the death of the settlor, till Birinchi Bihari Shah attained majority, the said property was managed and administered by his elder brother Banshi Bihari Shah and, during the aforesaid period, it was let out to the Arora Film Corporation. After the death of Banshi Behari Shah, Birinchi mutated his name as the owner in the assessment book of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation, and cleared all the municipal dues and taxes in respect of the property in question. The Kolkata Municipal Corporation also acknowledges by its letter dated 7th April, 2000 that there are no outstanding dues with regard to the property taxes for the property in question.
(3.) Birinchi was, all along, exercising his right as owner of the land and had paid off the municipal taxes whilst also remaining in possession of the property. In the writ petition, it is alleged that, during the year 2009, an attempt was made by the respondent authorities at the behest of some influential people of the locality to forcibly enter upon the said premises with intent to raise construction. In such a situation, a writ petition was filed by Birinchi, being W.P. No. 126 of 2009. In the said proceeding, the Corporation did not file any affidavit-in-opposition. The writ petition was disposed of on 17th September, 2009. In absence of any affidavit-in- opposition, the writ court, whilst disposing of the writ petition, directed the Municipal Commissioner to hold an enquiry to ascertain whether the land of the writ petitioner had been encroached upon or not and whether the writ petitioner is in lawful possession of the land and building forming the subject-matter of the writ petition. The Corporation was, however, restrained from raising any construction over the said property. It is alleged by the writ petitioner that in or about July, 2010, the writ petitioner received information from local sources that the Corporation had changed the name of Birinchi Bihari from the category of owner and had inserted its name as the owner of the property in question. Thereafter, Birinchi, from a letter of intimation obtained by him, found that such change had taken place but the assesee number had remained the same. This has resulted in the filing of a second writ petition, being W.P. No. 981 of 2010, in which Birinchi not only prayed for correction of the entries made in the assessment record but also sought to restrain the Corporation from interfering with the peaceful possession of the said owner. The writ petition was disposed of on 8th January, 2015 recording the concession made on behalf of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation that they were unable to controvert the statements made in the writ petition.;