Calcutta High Court
Unknown vs Md. Ehtesham Uddin on 28 April, 2025
Author: Rajasekhar Mantha
Bench: Rajasekhar Mantha
OD 1
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
ORIGINAL SIDE
APOT/79/2025
IA NO: GA/1/2025
MD MEHMOOD @ GANJA MAHMOOD & ORS.
.....Respondents/Appellants
VS
MD. EHTESHAM UDDIN
…Writ Petitioner/Respondents
THE KOLKATA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS.
….Respondents
BEFORE :
HON’BLE JUSTICE RAJASEKHAR MANTHA
-A N D-
HON’BLE JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR GUPTA
DATED : 28TH APRIL, 2025.
Appearance :-
Mr. A. Ghosh, Adv.
Mr. N. Chatterjee, Adv.
Mr. S. Hazra, Adv.
…for appellants
Mr.Debjit Mukherjee, Adv.
Ms. Susmita Chatterjee, Adv.
….for State
Ms. Piyali Sengupta, Adv.
Ms. Manisha Nath, Adv.
…for KMC
The Court :- (1) GA/1/2025 is an application for condonation of
341 days’ delay in preferring the appeal. The appellant is admittedly a
respondent in the writ petition.
2
(2) The order of upholding the demolition was passed by this
Court on 14th March, 2024.
(3) The petitioner claims at paragraph 3 that he came to know for
the first time of the said order when the officials of the Municipal
Corporation came to his premises on 9th December, 2024. At paragraph
4 it is stated that after the petitioner/appellant came to know of the
order dated 14th March, 2024 he applied for a certified copy and obtained
the same on 9th January, 2025. The period of thirty days from 9 th
December, 2024 to 9th January, 2025 has not even been remotely
explained. The claim of the appellant that he was not served with the
copy of the writ petition is not supported by any document. On the
contrary the respondents submit that since after the order dated 14 th
March, 2024 there were contempt proceedings and the matter was heard
on several days.
(4) This order of the Single Bench dated 14 th March, 2024 was
admittedly pasted on several portions of the said premises, demolition
whereof has been upheld by the Single Bench. It is difficult for this Court
to believe that the appellant came to know of the said order only in
December 2024.
(5) It is further submitted that the writ petition based on which
the order dated 14th March, 2024 was passed in respect of three several
premises. As to which premises the petitioner is concerned with is not
3
clear from the application. In the backdrop of the above this Court is of
the view that the appellant has not even made any serious attempt to
explain the delay of 341 days in preferring the instant appeal. This
Court, is therefore, not inclined to condone the delay of 341 days.
(6) GA/1/2025 shall stand dismissed. Consequently,
APOT/79/2025 shall also stand dismissed.
(RAJASEKHAR MANTHA, J.)
(AJAY KUMAR GUPTA, J.)
pkd/GH.
[ad_1]
Source link