Section 32 Arbitration Act | Termination for Non-Payment of Fees Ends Arbitrator’s Mandate; Remedy Lies in Section 14(2): Supreme Court False Allegations of Dowry and Bigamy Amount to Mental Cruelty: Madras High Court Upholds Divorce Plaintiff Must Prove Her Own Title Before Seeking Demolition Of Defendant’s Pre-existing House: Andhra Pradesh High Court Mismatch Between Bullet and Recovered Gun Fatal to Prosecution: Calcutta High Court Acquits Man Convicted for Murder Where the Conduct of the Sole Eye-Witness Appears Unnatural and No Independent Witness Is Examined, Conviction Cannot Stand: Allahabad High Court Fraudulent Sale of Vehicle During Hire Purchase Renders Agreement Void: Gauhati High Court Upholds Decree for Refund of ₹4.90 Lakhs Unsigned Written Statement Can’t Silence a Defendant: Hyper-Technical Objections Must Yield to Substantive Justice: Delhi High Court Default Bail | No Accused, No Extension: Delhi High Court Rules Custody Extension Without Notice as Gross Illegality Under Article 21 Gratuity Can Be Withheld Post-Retirement for Proven Negligence Under Service Rules – Payment of Gratuity Act Does Not Override CDA Rules: Calcutta High Court Cognizance Is of the Offence, Not the Offender: Madras High Court Rejects Challenge to ED’s Supplementary Complaint in PMLA Case Acquittal in Rajasthan No Bar to Trial in Madhya Pradesh: MP High Court Rejects Double Jeopardy Plea in Antiquities Theft Case 20% Deposit Isn’t Automatic in Cheque Bounce Appeals: Right to Appeal Can’t Be Priced Out: Punjab & Haryana High Court Checks Mechanical Use of Section 148 NI Act A Child Is Not a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Sets New Benchmark in Compensation for Minors’ Deaths 90 Days Is Not Sacrosanct – Courts Can Permit Reply to Counter-Claim Even Beyond Prescribed Time in Interest of Justice: Punjab & Haryana High Court Magistrate Can Proceed Only for Offences Committed in India Until Sanction Is Obtained for Acts Outside India: Orissa High Court on International Financial Fraud Award Is Vitiated by Non-Consideration of Material Evidence: Orissa High Court Sets Aside Industrial Tribunal’s Wage Award in IMFA Case POCSO | Absence of Child's Name in Birth Certificate Not Fatal: Kerala High Court No One Has the Right to Impute Illicit Motives to Judges in the Name of Free Speech: Karnataka High Court Jails Man for Criminal Contempt DV Complaint Cannot Be Quashed at Threshold Under Article 227: Madras High Court Refuses to Interfere, Directs Accused to Seek Remedy Before Magistrate Recovery Wasn't From Accused's Exclusive Knowledge — Cylinder Already Marked in Site Plan Before Arrest: Allahabad High Court Acquits Man in Murder Case State Can’t Block SARFAESI Sale by Late Revenue Entries: Secured Creditor’s Charge Prevails Over Tax Dues: Punjab & Haryana High Court Slams Sub-Registrar’s Refusal Providing SIM Card Without Knowledge of Its Criminal Use Does Not Imply Criminal Conspiracy: P&H High Court Grants Bail in UAPA & Murder Case Importer Who Accepts Enhanced Valuation Cannot Later Contest Confiscation and Penalty for Undervaluation: Madras High Court Upholds Strict Liability under Customs Act "Allegations Are Not Proof: Madras High Court Refuses Divorce Without Substantiated Cruelty or Desertion" When FIR Is Filed After Consulting Political Leaders, the Possibility of Coloured Version Cannot Be Ruled Out: Kerala High Court Mere Allegations of Antecedents Without Conviction Can't Defeat Right to Anticipatory Bail: Kerala High Court Section 106 Of Evidence Act Cannot Be Invoked In Vacuum – Prosecution Must First Lay Foundational Facts: Karnataka High Court Acquits Wife And Co-Accused In Husband’s Murder Case Parity Cannot Be Claimed When Roles Are Different: Karnataka High Court Refuses Bail to Youth Accused of Brutal Killing Injured Wife Would Not Falsely Implicate Her Husband: Gauhati High Court Upholds Conviction in Domestic Stabbing Case Disputed Bids, Missing Evidence and No Prejudice: Delhi High Court Refuses to Intervene in Tender Challenge under Article 226 Setting Fire to House Where Only Minors Were Present is a Heinous Offence – No Quashing Merely Because Parties Settled: Calcutta High Court No Exclusive Possession Means Licence, Not Lease: Calcutta High Court Rules City Civil Court Has Jurisdiction to Evict Licensees Defendant's Own Family Attested the Sale Agreement – Yet She Called It Nominal: Andhra Pradesh High Court Upholds Specific Performance Renewal Not Automatic, No Evidence Of Notice Or Mutual Agreement: AP High Court Dismisses Indian Oil’s Appeal Against Eviction

Leasehold Rights Cannot Confer Absolute Title: Calcutta High Court Mandates Freehold Conversion for KMDA Property

24 December 2024 4:26 PM

By: sayum


Court orders KMDA to execute a lease deed followed by conversion to freehold under the West Bengal Land Conversion Scheme, 2023, in favor of Roopkatha Bhattacharya. In a landmark judgment delivered on May 14, 2024, the Calcutta High Court ruled in favor of petitioner Roopkatha Bhattacharya, directing the Kolkata Metropolitan Development Authority (KMDA) to convert her leasehold property to freehold. Justice Rai Chattopadhyay emphasized that KMDA, possessing only leasehold rights, could not transfer absolute title, thereby mandating compliance with the West Bengal Land Conversion (Leasehold land to Freehold) Scheme, 2023.

The case centered on Roopkatha Bhattacharya’s claim against KMDA for its failure to execute a sale deed for property purchased by her mother in 2001. Despite full payment and possession in 2003, KMDA only proposed a lease deed in 2018, prompting Bhattacharya to seek judicial intervention to enforce the original sale terms or secure equivalent freehold rights.

Justice Chattopadhyay noted the petitioner’s grievance but highlighted KMDA’s legal limitations. “The KMDA, having only leasehold rights over the property conferred by the government, cannot transfer absolute title,” the judgment stated, affirming that the initial brochure promising a sale deed was legally untenable.

The court stressed the principle of caveat emptor, noting that the petitioner’s reliance on the brochure did not absolve her of the responsibility to understand KMDA’s property rights. “The purchaser must be aware of the rights of the transferor,” the court emphasized, clarifying that KMDA’s offer of a sale was beyond its legal authority.

The court deemed the application of the West Bengal Land Conversion Scheme, 2023, appropriate. Justice Chattopadhyay directed KMDA to execute the lease deed promptly and facilitate the conversion to freehold, ensuring no additional charges to the petitioner. This decision aligns with a similar Supreme Court precedent in Malay Kumar Mandal vs. Sanghamitra Mandal & Anr.

The court ordered that the stamp duty for the lease deed be calculated based on rates at the time of the initial possession transfer in 2003, thereby alleviating the petitioner’s financial burden due to KMDA’s delay.

Justice Chattopadhyay remarked, “The transferor cannot confer rights beyond its legal capacity. The KMDA, possessing only leasehold rights, can validly execute a lease deed, which can then be converted to freehold under the 2023 Scheme.”

 

 

This judgment not only resolves the long-standing dispute between Roopkatha Bhattacharya and KMDA but also sets a crucial precedent for similar cases involving leasehold properties under government ownership. By applying the West Bengal Land Conversion Scheme, 2023, the court has provided a clear legal pathway for converting leasehold rights to freehold, reinforcing the legal framework for property transactions in West Bengal.

Date of Decision: May 14, 2024

Latest Legal News