AMITAVA RAY Vs. SOUMITRA BANERJEE AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against a Judgement and Order dated 6.7.1999 passed by a learned single Judge of this Court whereby and whereunder the writ petition filed by the respondents hererin was allowed with the certain directions.

(2.) According to the writ petitioners, they had been allotted and/or sold the said flats by reason of agreement entered into by and between them and the developer, Sumanta Bose, proprietor of Progressive Construction-respondent No. 6 and Amitava Rayrespondent No. 4 in the writ petition since 1994 are in occupation thereof. The respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 4 had been given electrical connection from existing meter standing in the name of Respondnet No. 5 but the said electrical connection has been disconnected. The petitioners had applied for grant of separate electrical connection from the authorities of CESC Ltd. after their electrical connection were disconnected.

(3.) The appellant herein was added as respondent No. 4 in the writ petition in his Affidavit-in-Opposition inter alia, alleged :