Calcutta High Court
FMA/1234/2025 of THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE MALDA AND ORS Vs SMT DROPADI DEVI BHAGALEWALA AND ORS on 14 September 2026
J(2) In the High Court at Calcutta Civil Appellate Jurisdiction Appellate Side Present: The Hon’ble Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya And The Hon’ble Justice Sandip Kumar De FMA No. 1234 of 2025 The District Magistrate, Malda and others Vs. Smt Dropadi Devi Bhagalewala and others For
Form No. J(2)
In the High Court at Calcutta
Civil Appellate Jurisdiction
Appellate Side
Present:
The Hon’ble Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya
And
The Hon’ble Justice Sandip Kumar De
FMA No. 1234 of 2025
The District Magistrate, Malda and others
Vs.
Smt Dropadi Devi Bhagalewala and others
For the appellants
: None.
For the writ petitioner/
respondent no. 1
: Mr. Arif Ali, Adv.
Heard on
: 14.09.2026.
Judgment on
: 14.09.2026.
Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J.:-
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. The affidavit-of-service filed by the respondent no. 1 in Court today be kept on record.
2. Despite service, none appears for the appellants at the time of call.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent no. 1 points out that another appeal, bearing MAT No. 178 of 2024, preferred against the self-same order in respect of which the present appeal has been filed, was dismissed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court on the ground that in view of the State not availing of the migratory provisions available in the Act of 1948 and the Act of 1984 to make and publish a valid award within the time period stipulated in such mechanism, the entire
2
acquisition proceedings stood lapsed in view of the provisions of Section 7A of the Act of 1948 and resultantly the title to the land of the original owner revived. As such, it was held that any transfer subsequent to the first notice under the Act of 1948 cannot be held to be barred by law.
4. In such circumstances, the appeal was dismissed.
5. We find that the previous appeal was preferred at the behest of the West Bengal Industrial Infrastructure Development Corporation, the requiring body; whereas the present appeal has been preferred by the State in the name of the District Magistrate, Malda, as well as the West Bengal Industrial Infrastructure Development Corporation.
6. Thus, since the scopes of two appeals are the same, the Court is bound by the co-ordinate Bench judgment dated July 16, 2025 passed in MAT No. 178 of 2024.
7. Accordingly, in terms of the said order, FMA No. 1234 of 2025 is dismissed as well.
8. There will be no order as to costs.
9. Urgent certified copies of this order, if applied for, be made available to the parties upon compliance with the requisite formalities.
(Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J.) I agree.
(Sandip Kumar De, J.)