Plaintiff In Title Suit Must Prove Own Case On Independent Evidence, Cannot Rely On Weakness Of Defence: Supreme Court Advocate Commissioner's Failure To Localize Land Per Title Deeds Fatal To Encroachment Claim: Andhra Pradesh High Court Enmity Is A Double-Edged Weapon, Can Be Motive For False Implication As Much As For Crime: Allahabad High Court Parity In Bail: Karnataka High Court Grants Relief To Accused In Robbery Case As Mastermind & Main Offenders Were Already Enlarged Specific Performance Denied If Buyer Fails To Prove Continuous Readiness With Funds; Part-Payment Can't Be Forfeited Without Specific Clause: Delhi High Court Seized Vehicles Shouldn't Be Kept In Police Stations For Long, Courts Must Judiciously Exercise Power To Release On Supurdagi: Madhya Pradesh High Court Prolonged Incarceration Militates Against Article 21, Constitutional Principles Must Override Section 37 NDPS Rigors: Punjab & Haryana High Court Onus On Individual To Prove Claim Of 'Fear Of Religious Persecution' For Exemption Under Foreigners Act: Calcutta High Court Direct Recruits Cannot Claim Seniority From A Date Prior To Their Entry Into The Cadre: Orissa High Court Sale Deed Executed After Land Vests In State Confers No Title; Post-Vesting Purchaser Can’t Claim Compensation: Calcutta High Court No Right To Blanket Regularization For Contractual Staff; State Must Timely Fill Sanctioned Vacancies Under Reserved Quota: Supreme Court Non-Signatory Collaborator Under 'Deed Of Joint Undertaking' Can Invoke Arbitration Clause As A 'Veritable Party': Supreme Court Insolvency Proceedings Cannot Be Used As Coercive Recovery Mechanism For Complex Contractual Disputes: Supreme Court Legal Heirs Who Were Parties To Sale Cannot Challenge Transfer Under PTCL Act After Long Delay: Supreme Court SC/ST Act | Proceedings To Annul Sale Illegal If Initiated By Legal Heirs Who Were Parties To The Transaction: Supreme Court Consumers Cannot Be Burdened With Tariff Charges Beyond Period Of Service Delivery: Supreme Court Mere Non-Production Of Old Selection Records Or Non-Publication Of All Candidates' Marks No Ground To Direct Appointment: Supreme Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeals Against Acquittal In Sohrabuddin Shaikh Encounter Case; Says Prosecution Failed To Prove Conspiracy Dishonour Of Cheque Due To Signature Mismatch Or Incomplete Signature Attracts Section 138 NI Act: Supreme Court 138 NI Act | High Court Cannot Let Off Accused In NI Act Case By Ordering Only Cheque Amount Payment Without Interest Or Penalty: Supreme Court

Renovation/Repairing Work Not Contrary to Provisions of Law; Cannot Be Treated as Unauthorized: Calcutta High Court Upholds Legality of Construction at Bidhan Sarani Premises

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment, the Calcutta High Court has dismissed an appeal challenging the legality of renovation and construction work at premises no. 99A and 99C, Bidhan Sarani, Kolkata. The court confirmed that the renovations undertaken were within the bounds of the law, thereby upholding the earlier decision of the Single Judge.

The appeal contested the Single Judge’s ruling regarding construction and renovation work which was alleged to be unauthorized and contrary to the provisions of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980 (KMC Act) and Building Rules under the KMC Act. However, the High Court’s judgment affirmed that the activities undertaken were legally permissible.

The appellant, Smt. Pritha Nandy, contested the legality of the renovation works done by the respondents, arguing they exceeded the permissible limits under local municipal regulations and involved unauthorized alterations such as the demolition of partition walls and the erection of steel joists. The property in question, shared with her sister-in-law and other tenants, was under dispute in multiple civil suits concerning property rights and tenant evictions.

Issue of Unauthorized Construction: The court noted the expert report from the Director General, Building, Kolkata Municipal Corporation, which stated that the renovations including the installation of steel joists and the demolition of partition walls were necessary for structural safety and did not violate municipal law.

Compliance with Building Rules and KMC Act: The court analyzed the Building Rules and provisions of the KMC Act. The Director General’s report concluded that the construction was to secure the building and ensure the safety of its occupants and the public.

Property Rights and Civil Litigation: The High Court emphasized that the focus of their judgment was on municipal and safety compliance and not on resolving the broader property dispute, which was already the subject of ongoing civil litigation.

Decision: The appeal was dismissed, confirming that the renovation and construction at the disputed property were legally permissible. The court underscored compliance with local municipal standards and upheld the Single Judge’s dismissal of the writ petitions.

Date of Decision: May 10, 2024

Smt. Pritha Nandy Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors.

Latest Legal News