PANKAJ MADHOGARHIA Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner files this writ application for a direction upon the respondent to mutate his name as lessee in respect of Plot No. 44 Block-C/D, Sector-l, Salt Lake City, Kolkata-700 064. Since a point of law is involved in this matter, this matter is taken up for final disposal. The aforesaid plot of land was allotted in favour of one Dhirendra Nath Mondal (since deceased) by executing a deed of lease dated June 9th, 1982 for 999 years by the State Government. The aforesaid Dhirendra Nath Mondal made his last Will and testament dated October 11th, 2005. The petitioner was made sole beneficiary in respect of the unexpired period of lease-hold interest in respect of the aforesaid land by virtue of the above Will. After the expiry of the aforesaid Dhirendra Nath Mondal on November 16th, 2005, the executor of his last Will and testament dated October 11th, 2005 obtained probate in respect of the above Will. Thereafter the petitioner deposited all requisite fees on February 15th, 2006 for mutation of his name in respect of the plot of land in question for the unexpired period of lease-hold interest in the above plot. Since the respondent authority was sitting tight over the matter a demand for justice dated February 7th, 2007 was submitted to the respondent No. 2 by the learned Advocate for the petitioner. But the respondent authority did not pay any hit to the same. Hence the petitioner files this writ application.

(2.) Appearing on behalf of the petitioner, Mr. L.C. Bihani, the learned senior Advocate submits that in view of the provisions of sub-clause (12) of clause (2) of the deed of lease dated June 9th, 1982 there is no bar and/or impediment to transfer the leasehold right over the property for the unexpired period by the original lessee in favour of an stranger to the family of the original allottee. Mr. Bihani draws attention of this Court towards the decision of the State of West Bengal & Anr. v. Kailash Chandra Kapur & Ors., reported in (1997)2 SCC 387 submits that this issue has been decided in the matter. Mr Bihani further drawn attention of this Court towards decision of Sm. Kanta Devi Agarwal & Ors. v. State of West Bengal & Ors., (1999)1 Cal LT (HC) 345 submits that the identical issue was decided by this Court also relying upon the aforesaid decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

(3.) Mr. Amitava Chaudhuri, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the state respondents submits in has usual fairness that the issue may be decided by this Court in accordance with law taking into consideration settled principles of law. Having heard the learned Counsels for the parties and after taking into consideration and materials on records I find that this is admitted posftion that the plot in question was allotted in favour of one Dhirendra Nath Mondal (since deceased) by virtue of a deed of lease dated June 9th, 1982 for a period of 999 years. It is also admitted position that aforesaid late Dhirendra Nath Mondal made his last Will and testament dated October 11th, 2005 and the petitioner was the sole beneficiary in respect of unexpired period of lease-hold interest in respect of the property in question by virtue of that Will. It is also admitted that the executor of the above Will obtained probate in resipect of the above last Will and testament dated October 11th, 2005 of late Dhirendra Nath Mondal. It appears from annexure 'P-4' at page 39 of this writ application that the petitioner deposited the requisite fee on February 15th, 2006 for mutation of his name in respect of the aforesaid land in question for the unexpired period of lease-hold interest on the same.