02. Ct. No.17 g.b. WPA 22891 of 2019 (Assigned) Manoj Kumar Bhattacharjee & Ors. v. The State of West Bengal Mr. Sattwik Bhattacharyya Mr. Aashutosh Bhattacharyya …….For & Ors.
Case at a glance
- Bench
- ABHIJIT GANGOPADHYAY
Outcome
Disposed of
The matter is disposed of with the above
Provisions considered
Judgment
Mr. Swapan Kr. Datta, learned advocate appearing for the respondent/State has drawn my attention to Section 3H(4) of the National Highways Act, 1956 which is as follows:
3H. Deposit and payment of amount.- (1)*************** (2)*************** (3)*************** (4) If any dispute arises as to the apportionment of the amount or any part thereof or to any person to whom the same or any part thereof is payable, the competent authority shall refer the dispute to the decision of the principal civil court of original jurisdiction within the limits of whose jurisdiction the land is situated.
As there is a statutory provision for resolution of dispute as to the apportionment of the land, as has been referred in the said Section 3H(4) of the aforesaid Act, I relegate this matter to the said competent authority for referring the dispute to the decision of Principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction having jurisdiction for apportionment of the amount. While deciding the claims of the legal representatives of Gopal Chandra Bhattacharjee, the competent authority shall take into account the partition decree which has been placed before this court by way of a supplementary affidavit affirmed on 30th November,
Operative part
2021. I direct the petitioners to file the said partition decree before the hearing by the court along with a 3 copy of this order passed today. As of now I do not think any further adjudication is required to be made in view of Section 3H(4) of the aforesaid Act. I direct the Civil Court to decide the issue of apportionment within a period of four months from the date of communication of this order. The certified copy of the order sheet has been filed in court today be kept on record. It has been submitted by the writ petitioners that Manoj Kumar Bhattacharjee, who is one of the petitioners before this court has been shown as a person expired on 22.03.2009. I fail to understand how such thing has been recorded when said Manoj Kumar Bhattacharjee is present before this court, who is an advocate and claiming that he is Manoj Kumar Bhattacharjee, who has filed this writ application. I direct the prescribed authority to rectify this mistake forthwith preferably within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. The matter is disposed of with the above observation and direction. (Abhijit Gangopadhyay, J.) 4
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: The matter is disposed of with the above
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
National Highways Act, 1956.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.