Calcutta High Court
FMA/540/2024 of ARUN JANA AND ANR Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. on 21 April 2026
Court No. 12 ML 29 April 2026 Sandip IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE F.M.A. 540 of 2024 CAN 1 of 2026 Arun Jana & Anr. -Versus- The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Anup Dasgupta …..for the appellants 1) Affidavit- of -service filed on
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.
21.04.2026 Court No. 12 ML 29 April 2026 Sandip IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE F.M.A. 540 of 2024 CAN 1 of 2026 Arun Jana & Anr.
-Versus-
The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Anup Dasgupta …..for the appellants
Affidavit-of-service filed on behalf of the appellants is taken on record.
Despite service none appears on behalf of the respondents.
We do not entertain the appeal. The appeal is based on subsequent cause of action. An information was received under the Right to Information Act from the concerned gram panchayat that the alleged construction of the respondent nos. 9 and 10 were without permission.
When the writ petition was disposed of, Her Lordship recorded that the panchayat authorities had stated that the nature of the wall constructed by the said respondents did not require permission.
Her Lordship also recorded that the dispute with regard to ownership and possession was in respect of a common passage, which could not be decided either by the writ Court or by the Panchayat Authority.
Under such circumstances, we do not interfere with the order impugned. However, the appellants always have the liberty to take further steps in accordance with law on the basis of the receipt of subsequent information.
Accordingly, the appeal and the connected application are dismissed.
Urgent photostat certified copy of the order, if applied for, be given to the parties, upon usual undertakings. The order impugned is set aside. (Shampa Sarkar, J.) (Ajay Kumar Gupta, J.)