Calcutta High Court
APO/16/2026 of AKHTER MAHMUD AND ANR Vs MUSTARI BEGUM AND ORS on 13 August 2026
SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE APO/16/2026 IA NO: GA/1/2026 GA/2/2026 AKHTER MAHMUD AND ANR. VS MUSTARI BEGUM AND ORS. BEFORE: The Hon’ble JUSTICE SHAMPA SARKAR AND The Hon’ble JUSTICE ARJUN RAY MUKHERJEE Date: 13th August, 2026.
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.
OD 4
ORDER SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE
APO/16/2026 IA NO: GA/1/2026 GA/2/2026 AKHTER MAHMUD AND ANR. VS MUSTARI BEGUM AND ORS.
BEFORE: The Hon’ble JUSTICE SHAMPA SARKAR AND The Hon’ble JUSTICE ARJUN RAY MUKHERJEE Date: 13th August, 2026.
Appearance: Mr. Aniruddha Chatterjee, Sr.Adv. Mr. Avirup Chatterjee, Adv. Mr. Abir Lal Chakraborty, Adv. Mr. Rishov Das, Adv. …for the appellants
Mr. Sumitavo Chakraborty, Adv. Ms. Satabdi Das, Adv. …for the Intervenors
Mr. Alak Kumar Ghosh, Adv. Mr. Gopal Chandra Das, Adv. …for KMC
Mr. Jayak Kumar Gupta, Adv. Mr.A.Rosul, Adv. Mr. S.S. Biswas, Adv. …for the private respondent
The Court: We are not inclined to interfere with the order of His Lordship. His Lordship directed the Corporation to conclude the
2 proceedings under Section 400(1) of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980. One of the occupiers was allowed to continue operation of business from the premises and none else. We do not find any illegality in such direction. The application for intervention is dismissed. We do not find any reason to allow any other person to carry on business from the premises which appears prima facie to be unauthorized. Mr. Chatterjee, learned senior advocate submits that His Lordship had bound the appellants to the undertaking filed on February 12, 2026. In our view, the undertaking before the Court will be subject to the proceeding initiated by the Corporation. If the building survives and the appellants are successful in proving that the construction is legal, the undertaking will revive. If the building is demolished, the undertaking loses its value. If in future the building is constructed upon demolition of the present structure, the undertaking will again revive. The KMC will reach the proceedings to its logical conclusion, without being influenced by the private dispute between the appellant and the respondent Nos. 1 and 2. The appeal and the applications are disposed of accordingly.
(SHAMPA SARKAR, J.)
(ARJUN RAY MUKHERJEE, J.) TR/