AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J
The grievance of the petitioner, who is appearing in person with the leave of court, is that despite several requests of the petitioner, the respondent no.1 is not furnishing a lease deed, which is lying with the said Corporation, for which the petitioner prays for a direction to that effect.
The respondent no.1 is also represented by one of its officers. It is submitted by the said officer that the property was mortgaged, in connection with which the lease deed was submitted to the respondent no.1 by the petitioner himself and as such, unless the petitioner produces some evidence to show that his liabilities regarding the mortgage have been satisfied, there is no scope for the respondent no.1 to return the original of such lease deed to the petitioner.
It is evident from the submissions of the parties that the matter pertains to a civil dispute and requires detailed examination of facts upon adduction of evidence by both sides, which is beyond the scope of the writ court.
It is further noticed that the prayers made verbally by the petitioner does not find place in the writ petition, which pertains to rights relating to the property in question.
Accordingly, W.P. 5110(W) of 2020 is disposed of by granting the petitioner liberty to approach an appropriate Civil Court with the remedies prayed for in the present writ petition.
In the event the Civil Court is approached, it will take up such matter independently, without being influenced by any observation made in this order.
There will be no order as to costs.
Urgent photostat copies of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties upon compliance of all requisite formalities.