{"id":306349,"date":"2023-11-04T10:00:40","date_gmt":"2023-11-04T04:30:40","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=306349"},"modified":"2023-11-08T17:40:18","modified_gmt":"2023-11-08T12:10:18","slug":"permissive-possession-does-not-create-possessory-rights-calcutta-high-court-scc-blog-legal-news","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/11\/04\/permissive-possession-does-not-create-possessory-rights-calcutta-high-court-scc-blog-legal-news\/","title":{"rendered":"\u2018Permissive possession does not create possessory rights\u2019; Calcutta High Court upholds KMDA\u2019s right to cancel the land allotment"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Calcutta High Court:<\/span> In a writ petition seeking the cancellation and setting aside of a letter of cancellation of land allotment, a single-judge bench comprising of Jay Sengupta,* J.<\/span>, dismissed the writ petition, concluding that the petitioners were in permissive possession, and the authorities had the right to cancel the land allotment due to the petitioners’ delay in adhering to the stipulated conditions.<\/p>\n

Factual Matrix<\/p>\n

The petitioner preferred the present writ petition seeking direction to the respondent authorities, Kolkata Metropolitan Development Authority (KMDA), not to dispossess them from a 6-acre land plot. The petitioner also requested the cancellation and setting aside of a letter of cancellation of allotment dated 14-12-2007\/17-12-2007.<\/p>\n

The petitioner had received a letter of allotment from KMDA with the intention of developing the land. The conditions stipulated in the letter required the construction to start within 90 days of approval and be completed within three years from the approval date of the plan by the Kolkata Municipal Corporation (KMC) dated 13-02-2007. KMDA later terminated the land allotment, citing various grounds, including the failure to submit a Detailed Project Report (DPR), a copy of a sanctioned building plan, and failure to initiate construction within the stipulated timeframes.<\/p>\n

Moot Point<\/p>\n

Whether the termination of land allotment by KMDA to the petitioner was lawful, and whether the writ of mandamus should be granted to the petitioner?<\/p>\n

Petitioner’s Contentions<\/p>\n

The petitioner argued that the unilateral imposition of new terms by KMDA, despite full payment, was intended to cancel the allotment. The petitioner had already submitted a DPR, which was accepted by KMDA, and no formal rejection had been communicated.<\/p>\n

The petitioner contended the wrongful termination of allotment was based on new grounds, which were introduced later. It was further stated that the petitioner had acquired vested rights in the land by making full payments and taking possession.<\/p>\n

Respondent’s Contentions<\/p>\n

The KMDA contended that the petitioner was in permissive possession, not been granted physical possession of the land and no lease deed was executed in their favor. It was contended that the allotment of land did not create possessory rights, and permissive possession was given for a limited purpose.<\/p>\n

The KMDA contended that the delay in initiating the construction, as stipulated in the letter of allotment, was due to the petitioner’s inaction, moreover, imposition of further conditions was not retrospective, and the petitioner had accepted such conditions when the extension of time was granted. It was further stated that the letter of allotment was not exhaustive and would be supplemented by terms in the lease deed.<\/p>\n

Court’s Assessment<\/p>\n

The Court, after considering the arguments presented, held that the petitioner was in permissive possession, and no physical possession or lease deed was executed in their favor. Therefore, they did not acquire possessory rights over the land. The Court noted that the petitioner had contributed to the delay in executing the lease deed, and the conditions imposed in the letter of allotment were not retrospective.<\/p>\n

The Court also emphasized that the availability of land is limited, and the authorities could not allow it to remain unused. Necessary stipulations for land usage were reasonable, and the petitioner could not take advantage of their delay in executing the lease deed to avoid being bound by those stipulations.<\/p>\n

Court’s Decision<\/p>\n

The Court found no merit in the writ petition and dismissed it. The interim order, if any, was vacated, and no costs were imposed on either party.<\/p>\n

[Tai Industries Ltd.<\/span> v. State of W.B.<\/span>, 2023 SCC OnLine Cal 4174<\/a>, order dated 02-11-2023<\/span>]<\/p>\n

*Judgment by Justice Jay Sengupta<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n\n

Advocates who appeared in this case :<\/p>\n

Mr. Ranjan Batchawat, Mr. Suman Kr. Dutt, Mr. Syamantak Banerjee, Mr. S. Dasgupta, Ms. Subhra Das, Mr. S. Mitra, Counsel for the Petitioner<\/p>\n

Mr. Kishore Dutta, Mr. Satyajit Talukdar, Counsel for the KMDA<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Calcutta High Court held that the physical possession of the land was not given to the petitioners, and no lease deed was executed in their favor, leading to the conclusion that they were in permissive possession.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67514,"featured_media":290502,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[2689,30327,59915,62475,55415,38930],"class_list":["post-306349","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-Calcutta_High_Court","tag-cancellation","tag-justice-jay-sengupta","tag-kmda","tag-land-allotment","tag-permissive-possession"],"yoast_head":"\nPermissive possession does not create possessory rights: Calcutta High Court | SCC Blog<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"While upholding KMDA's right to cancel the land allotment, Calcutta High Court held that Permissive possession does not create possessory rights.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/11\/04\/permissive-possession-does-not-create-possessory-rights-calcutta-high-court-scc-blog-legal-news\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"\u2018Permissive possession does not create possessory rights\u2019; Calcutta High Court upholds KMDA\u2019s right to cancel the land allotment\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"While upholding KMDA's right to cancel the land allotment, Calcutta High Court held that Permissive possession does not create possessory rights.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/11\/04\/permissive-possession-does-not-create-possessory-rights-calcutta-high-court-scc-blog-legal-news\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2023-11-04T04:30:40+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2023-11-08T12:10:18+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"886\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"590\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Ritu\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"\u2018Permissive possession does not create possessory rights\u2019; Calcutta High Court upholds KMDA\u2019s right to cancel the land allotment\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Ritu\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"3 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/11\/04\/permissive-possession-does-not-create-possessory-rights-calcutta-high-court-scc-blog-legal-news\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/11\/04\/permissive-possession-does-not-create-possessory-rights-calcutta-high-court-scc-blog-legal-news\/\",\"name\":\"Permissive possession does not create possessory rights: Calcutta High Court | SCC Blog\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/11\/04\/permissive-possession-does-not-create-possessory-rights-calcutta-high-court-scc-blog-legal-news\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/11\/04\/permissive-possession-does-not-create-possessory-rights-calcutta-high-court-scc-blog-legal-news\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2023-11-04T04:30:40+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2023-11-08T12:10:18+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/392f265bae2f48f0f0d02b8e0e9015b9\"},\"description\":\"While upholding KMDA's right to cancel the land allotment, Calcutta High Court held that Permissive possession does not create possessory rights.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/11\/04\/permissive-possession-does-not-create-possessory-rights-calcutta-high-court-scc-blog-legal-news\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/11\/04\/permissive-possession-does-not-create-possessory-rights-calcutta-high-court-scc-blog-legal-news\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/11\/04\/permissive-possession-does-not-create-possessory-rights-calcutta-high-court-scc-blog-legal-news\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"calcutta high court\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/11\/04\/permissive-possession-does-not-create-possessory-rights-calcutta-high-court-scc-blog-legal-news\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"\u2018Permissive possession does not create possessory rights\u2019; Calcutta High Court upholds KMDA\u2019s right to cancel the land allotment\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/392f265bae2f48f0f0d02b8e0e9015b9\",\"name\":\"Ritu\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c47318594774c1fe55e3e8c85dcd1909276373d9bf11730032fc1a7d05d56a47?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c47318594774c1fe55e3e8c85dcd1909276373d9bf11730032fc1a7d05d56a47?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Ritu\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_7\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Permissive possession does not create possessory rights: Calcutta High Court | SCC Blog","description":"While upholding KMDA's right to cancel the land allotment, Calcutta High Court held that Permissive possession does not create possessory rights.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/11\/04\/permissive-possession-does-not-create-possessory-rights-calcutta-high-court-scc-blog-legal-news\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"\u2018Permissive possession does not create possessory rights\u2019; Calcutta High Court upholds KMDA\u2019s right to cancel the land allotment","og_description":"While upholding KMDA's right to cancel the land allotment, Calcutta High Court held that Permissive possession does not create possessory rights.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/11\/04\/permissive-possession-does-not-create-possessory-rights-calcutta-high-court-scc-blog-legal-news\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2023-11-04T04:30:40+00:00","article_modified_time":"2023-11-08T12:10:18+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Ritu","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"\u2018Permissive possession does not create possessory rights\u2019; Calcutta High Court upholds KMDA\u2019s right to cancel the land allotment","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Ritu","Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/11\/04\/permissive-possession-does-not-create-possessory-rights-calcutta-high-court-scc-blog-legal-news\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/11\/04\/permissive-possession-does-not-create-possessory-rights-calcutta-high-court-scc-blog-legal-news\/","name":"Permissive possession does not create possessory rights: Calcutta High Court | SCC Blog","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/11\/04\/permissive-possession-does-not-create-possessory-rights-calcutta-high-court-scc-blog-legal-news\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/11\/04\/permissive-possession-does-not-create-possessory-rights-calcutta-high-court-scc-blog-legal-news\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp","datePublished":"2023-11-04T04:30:40+00:00","dateModified":"2023-11-08T12:10:18+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/392f265bae2f48f0f0d02b8e0e9015b9"},"description":"While upholding KMDA's right to cancel the land allotment, Calcutta High Court held that Permissive possession does not create possessory rights.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/11\/04\/permissive-possession-does-not-create-possessory-rights-calcutta-high-court-scc-blog-legal-news\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/11\/04\/permissive-possession-does-not-create-possessory-rights-calcutta-high-court-scc-blog-legal-news\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/11\/04\/permissive-possession-does-not-create-possessory-rights-calcutta-high-court-scc-blog-legal-news\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"calcutta high court"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/11\/04\/permissive-possession-does-not-create-possessory-rights-calcutta-high-court-scc-blog-legal-news\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"\u2018Permissive possession does not create possessory rights\u2019; Calcutta High Court upholds KMDA\u2019s right to cancel the land allotment"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/392f265bae2f48f0f0d02b8e0e9015b9","name":"Ritu","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c47318594774c1fe55e3e8c85dcd1909276373d9bf11730032fc1a7d05d56a47?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c47318594774c1fe55e3e8c85dcd1909276373d9bf11730032fc1a7d05d56a47?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Ritu"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_7\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":308378,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/04\/calcutta-high-court-directs-collector-to-issue-formal-order-of-de-requisition-scc-blog-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":306349,"position":0},"title":"Calcutta High Court affirms right to seek de-requisition; directs Collector to issue formal order of de-requisition","author":"Ritu","date":"December 4, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The Calcutta High Court establishes the legal consequences of a court order setting aside requisition and its impact on subsequent attempts to acquire or lease the land.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"calcutta high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":371821,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/06\/land-allotment-cancellation-due-to-unauthorised-construction-not-justified-jk-hc\/","url_meta":{"origin":306349,"position":1},"title":"Unauthorized construction does not justify cancellation of allotment of land in lieu of acquisition on Monarch’s orders: J&K and Ladakh HC","author":"Sunaina","date":"January 6, 2026","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cThe cancellation order, on the face of it, appeared to be a brazen endeavour of the official machinery to deprive a land owner of his legitimate right to have an alternative in lieu of his acquired land by the State.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"allotment cancellation due to unauthorised construction","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/allotment-cancellation-due-to-unauthorised-construction.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/allotment-cancellation-due-to-unauthorised-construction.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/allotment-cancellation-due-to-unauthorised-construction.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/allotment-cancellation-due-to-unauthorised-construction.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":213143,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/04\/03\/raj-hc-court-to-take-into-account-reasons-while-determining-revision-filed-after-significant-delay\/","url_meta":{"origin":306349,"position":2},"title":"Raj HC | Court to take into account reasons while determining revision filed after significant delay","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"April 3, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Rajasthan High Court: The Bench of Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J., allowed the writ petition filed to challenge the order passed by the District Collector whereby revision petition was allowed and the valid pattas issued to the petitioner were cancelled. The facts of the case were that the petitioners were in\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":299552,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/17\/calcutta-hc-restrains-encroachment-of-private-land-by-respondent-authorities\/","url_meta":{"origin":306349,"position":3},"title":"Calcutta High Court restrains Irrigation and Waterways Department from encroaching private land","author":"Ritu","date":"August 17, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The Calcutta High Court ruled in favor of the petitioners, finding that the respondents had not acquired the land in question and issued a writ of mandamus to restrain the encroachment.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"calcutta high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":304185,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/09\/calcutta-high-court-grants-permission-to-hold-peaceful-religious-jalsha-subject-to-conditions-scc-blog\/","url_meta":{"origin":306349,"position":4},"title":"Calcutta High Court grants permission to hold peaceful \u2018Religious Jalsha\u2019 subject to maintenance of certain norms","author":"Ritu","date":"October 9, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Calcutta High Court directed respondent authorities to maintain a sharp vigilant presence at the event to ensure the preservation of peace.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"calcutta high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":297520,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/07\/24\/writ-petition-filed-after-suit-seeking-same-relief-withdrawn-not-maintainable-sc-reiterates-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":306349,"position":5},"title":"Writ Petition filed after Suit seeking same relief was withdrawn without liberty to file afresh not Maintainable: SC reiterates","author":"Editor","date":"July 24, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The Supreme Court called the matter at hand a classic case in which a litigant had been able to mislead the Courts and authorities at different levels to put life into his stale claim.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"maintainability of writ petition","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/maintainability-of-writ-petition.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/maintainability-of-writ-petition.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/maintainability-of-writ-petition.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/maintainability-of-writ-petition.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/306349","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67514"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=306349"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/306349\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/290502"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=306349"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=306349"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=306349"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}