ARTI VERMA Vs. KOLKATA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Despite service, none appears on behalf of the KMC, although the writ petitioners and the private respondents are represented in Court today.

(2.) Learned counsel appearing for the applicants contends that, during pendency of the Writ Petition bearing WPO/577/2017, the private respondent no. 7, that is, the landlord in respect of a premises wherein the applicants are tenants, demolished the tenanted portion of the property-in-dispute. It is submitted by learned counsel that the landlord had given a specific undertaking, as recorded in paragraph nos. 7 and 8 of the affidavit filed by the respondent no. 7 before this Court in connection with the writ petition (appearing at pages 24 and 25 of the present application) that the respondent no. 7 (landlord) would provide the required spaces to the writ petitioners/applicants as soon as the respondent no. 7 would complete the newly constructed building over the said premises; provided further that the respondent no. 7 would get the completion certificate regarding construction of new building over the said premises from the competent authority of the respondent Kolkata Municipal Corporation. The respondent no. 7 also gave an undertaking to the effect that the writ petitioners/present applicants would get the same area in terms of square feet as they are rightly enjoying over the said premises-in-question after getting approval from the Kolkata Municipal Corporation relating to completion certificate of the newly constructed building over the said premises in accordance with the necessary Building Rules of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980.

(3.) However, despite having given such undertaking, it is alleged that the respondent no. 7 demolished the applicants ' portion of the said premises in violation thereof.