Chinmoy Dey v. The Andaman And Nicobar Administration, And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

[ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ] ...

WPA/823/2023 Shri Chinmoy Dey ... Petitioner Vs.

The Andaman & Nicobar Administration) and Ors. ... Respondents Ms. G. Mini ...for the Petitioner Mr. V.D Sivabalan Mr. Arun S. Kumar ...for the Respondents July 24, 2023 (M.A.Mobin) Item No.25 The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent No.2 has kept the appeal filed by the petitioner on 4th May, 2023 under section 72 of the Indian Registration Act 1908 pending.

The petitioner says that the petitioner's father Late Santosh Kumar Dey was a recorded tenant in respect of the land bearing Survey No. 40/1/7 corresponding to new Survey No. 2415, situated at South Point Village under Port Blair Tehsil, District South Andaman (hereinafter referred to as the said property).

According to the petitioner, his father during his lifetime had made and published a will on 20th June, 2021 and had bequeathed the aforesaid property in favour of his two sons namely Sukumar Dey and Chinmoy Dey.

Ms. G. Mini, learned Advocate representing the petitioner submits that the petitioner had since, entered

into a family settlement with the legal heirs of late Santosh Kumar Dey in respect of the aforesaid property. Although, the said settlement was presented for registration before the respondent No.3, he has refused to register the same. Being aggrieved with such refusal, the petitioner has preferred an appeal under Section 72 of the Indian Registration Act, 1908 which is pending adjudication. It is submitted that by reasons of the failure on the part of the respondent No.2 to hear out the aforesaid appeal the petitioner is suffering irreparable loss.

Mr. Sivabalan, learned Advocate representing the respondents enters appearance in the matter. He submits that although, no time limit has been prescribed for disposal of an appeal filed under Section 72 of the Indian Registration Act, 1908, ordinarily an appeal is disposed of within a period of 90 days.

Having regard to the submissions made by Mr.

Sivabalan, and taking note of the pendency of the appeal since, 4th May 2023, I am of the view that the present writ application can be disposed of by directing the respondent No.2 to dispose of the appeal filed by the petitioner within a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of this order.

It is made clear that the respondent No.2 shall dispose of the said appeal by passing a reasoned order after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and any other person interested.

With the aforesaid observations and directions, the present writ application is disposed of.

There shall be no order as to costs.

(Raja Basu Chowdhury, J.)