Victim Has Locus To Request Court To Summon Witnesses Under Section 311 CrPC In State Prosecution: Allahabad High Court Order 2 Rule 2 CPC Cannot Be Ground to Reject a Plaint: Supreme Court Draws Crucial Distinction Between Bar to Sue and Bar by Law No Right to Lawyer Before Advisory Board in Preventive Detention — Unless Government Appears Through Legal Practitioner: Supreme Court Wife's Dowry Statement Cannot Be Used to Prosecute Her for 'Giving' Dowry: Supreme Court Upholds Section 7(3) Shield Husband's Loan Repayments Cannot Reduce Wife's Maintenance: Supreme Court Raises Amount to ₹25,000 From ₹15,000 Prisoners Don't Surrender Their Rights at the Prison Gate: Supreme Court Issues Binding SOP to End Delays in Legal Aid Appeals A Judgment Must Be a Self-Contained Document Even When Defendant Never Appears: Supreme Court on Ex Parte Decrees Court Cannot Dismiss Ex Parte Suit on Unpleaded, Unframed Issue: Supreme Court Sets Aside Specific Performance Decree Denied on Title Erroneous High Court Observations Cannot Be Used to Stake Property Claims: Supreme Court Steps In to Prevent Misuse of Judicial Observations No Criminal Proceedings Would Have Been Initiated Had Financial Settlement Succeeded: Supreme Court Grants Anticipatory Bail In Rape Case Directors Cannot Escape Pollution Law Prosecution by Claiming Ignorance: Allahabad High Court Refuses to Quash Summons Against Company Directors Order 7 Rule 11 CPC | Court Cannot Peek Into Defence While Rejecting Plaint: Delhi High Court Death 3½ Months After Accident Doesn't Break Causal Link If Doctors Testify Injuries Could Cause Death: Andhra Pradesh High Court LLB Intern Posed as Supreme Court Advocate, Used Fake Bar Council Card and Police Station Seals to Defraud Victims of Rs. 80 Lakhs: Gujarat High Court Rejects Anticipatory Bail Husband Who Travels to Wife's City on Leave, Cohabits With Her, Then Claims She 'Never Lived With Him' Cannot Prove Cruelty: Jharkhand High Court Liquor Licence Is a State Privilege, Not a Citizen's Right — No Vested Right of Renewal Survives a Change in Rules: Karnataka High Court Sets Aside Stay on E-Auction Policy Court Holiday Cannot Save Prosecution From Default Bail: MP High Court No Search At Your Premises, No Incriminating Document, No Case: Rajasthan HC Quashes Rs. 18 Crore Tax Assessment Under Section 153C Limitation Act | Litigant Cannot Be Punished For Court's Own Docket Load: J&K High 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