Sree Sree Kripamoyee Kalika Thakurani And ORS v. Runa Pyne
June 15, 2023 Sl. No.118 Court No.19 s.biswas WPCRC 95 of 2023 Sree Sree Kripamoyee Kalika Thakurani and others vs.
Runa Pyne Mr. Suchit Banerjee Mr. Indranil Banerjee ... for the petitioners Mr. Alak Kumar Ghosh Mr. Gopal Chandra Das Mr. Shubhrangsu Panda ... for the contemnor The alleged contemnor Ms. Runa Pyne is present before the court in compliance of the contempt rule.
It is submitted by Mr. Ghosh, learned advocate for the alleged contemnor, that there is no willful disobedience of the order passed by this court. It is further submitted that the assessment orders which were prayed for were non-existent as no assessment had been made in respect of the premises situated at 87E, Cossipore Road, Kolkata700002 for the assessment years 2018-19, 2019-20 and 2020-21. Bills were being raised on the basis of the assessment of 2004, but the documents with regard to such assessment of 2004, were not available. The Corporation however offered to allow the applicants inspection and extracts of the inspection book of 2004, on the basis of which bills were being raised. Applicants were asked to comply with some formalities and to pay cost.
This court is of the view that a direction was passed by the High Court to supply the orders. Proper compliance of the order of this court would be to supply extracts of the inspection book, if the assessment order of 2004 was not available in the records.
The present incumbent in the office of assessor collector (north) shall prepare an extract of the inspection book of 2004 in which the evaluation and assessment has been recorded in respect of the premises No. 87E, Cossipore Road, Kolkata-700002, without insisting on other compliances and without asking for any costs. Such extract will be given within a week from date of communication of this order to the learned advocate on record of the petitioner, by Mr. Das learned Advocate for the Corporation.
The issue which has been now raised by Mr.
Banerjee, learned advocate for the petitioners that the present billings indicate fresh revision, cannot be decided in the contempt application.
The petitioner is at liberty to proceed in accordance with law.
Under such circumstance, the contempt application is disposed of. The contempt proceeding is dropped. The rule is discharged.
(Shampa Sarkar, J.)