SAKUNTALA DEVI AGARWAL Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant's contention is that, she has applied for, duly complied with all the formalities and obtained "mutation certificate" with respect to her leasehold property and is now legally free to mortgage her said property for what so ever purpose (for the purpose of a loan in this case), which she has been wrongfully prevented to do, by the respondent vide the impugned letter dtd. 27/5/2015. Appellant's further contention is that her right to mortgage her leasehold property, is not subjected to the fact as to whether or not the property has been mutated in her name, in the government records. Respondent could not have overlooked her such right in the property, irrespective of its mutation being done in her name in government records. That, her right, title and interest to the said property as a lessee thereof, is not extinguished even if mutation thereof is not done, so is her right to deal with her leasehold property, free from all encumbrances. In such view of the matter, the letter dtd. 27/5/2015, impugned in the writ petition is arbitrary and illegal. Thus, the appellant has challenged the judgment of the Hon'ble Single Judge dtd. 30/1/2019 in W.P.A. No.792 (W) of 2017, by dint of which her challenge to the said impugned letter dtd. 27/5/2015 was turned down by the Bench and the said writ petition was dismissed.

(2.) The impugned judgment of the Hon'ble Single Judge is annexed to the Memorandum of Appeal here. The Hon'ble Single Judge has noted that the concerned leasehold property is situated at Premises No.CA-34, Sector-I, Bidhan Nagar, Salt Lake City, Kolkata- 700064. The Hon'ble Single Judge has also noted that by sending the impugned letter dtd. 27/5/2015, the respondent has informed the appellant regarding its inability to issue 'No Objection Certificate' to her, on the ground that she has not mutated her name as the lessee of the said plot of land. It appears that after considering the submissions of the respective parties, the Hon'ble Single Judge noted the appellant to have failed to come before the Court with clean hands, by disclosing all the materials and circumstances, to seek an equitable relief and on the ground as above has dismissed the writ petition. The Hon'ble Single Judge has also imposed a cost of Rs.25000.00 (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) to be paid by the present appellant to the State Legal Service Authority, West Bengal, within a period of 4 (four) weeks from the date of the impugned judgment.

(3.) The said judgment dtd. 30/1/2019 is under challenge in this appeal. Mr. Bose appearing for the appellant has during his argument concentrated on one hand on the factual aspect of the case and on the other, on the legal points, as are stated in brief herein below.