AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Ananya Bandyopadhyay, J.:-
The present application has been taken out by the applicant seeking leave to intervene in the representative suit, being C.S. No. 343 of 1979, for the limited purpose of securing execution and registration of the deed of conveyance in respect of Unit No. 18G, situated on the 18th floor of Everest Building, at 46C, Jawaharlal Nehru Road, Kolkata–700071, in favour of Gayson & Company Private Limited, the nominee of the applicant.
The application assumes significance against the somewhat protracted history of the proceedings relating to the Everest Building and the several orders passed from time to time by this Court facilitating execution and registration of conveyances in favour of persons claiming through the original owners of the respective units.
The applicant has placed on record the relevant orders passed in the proceedings and the documents relied upon in support of the relief sought. The sequence of events disclosed from the record merits brief recital, since the prayer presently made cannot be appreciated in isolation from the course which the proceedings have taken over the years.
Pursuant to an order dated 9 January 2012, the Special Officer appointed by this Court proceeded in compliance therewith and took the necessary steps for execution of the requisite conveyance in favour of the intending purchaser.
Thereafter, one of the office owners of Everest, Mrs. Abha Bengani, approached this Court by filing G.A. No. 3595 of 2016, inter alia seeking leave to serve the petition upon Everest Owners' Association, appointment of a Special Officer for execution and registration of the necessary conveyance in respect of Office No. 12-B on the 12th floor of Everest Building, and consequential directions upon the Registrar of Assurances, Kolkata.
In the said application, this Court passed orders from time to time directing publication and thereafter facilitating execution and registration of the deed of conveyance. Copies of the orders dated 30 January 2017, 14 February 2017 and 28 March 2017 have been placed on record.
Pursuant to the order dated 28 March 2017, the Special Officer appointed therein took steps for execution of the necessary conveyance in favour of the applicant therein.
The main suit, namely C.S. No. 343 of 1979, thereafter appeared before the Hon'ble Justice Shekhar B. Saraf on 18 June 2019. Upon consideration of the submissions advanced on behalf of one of the flat owners and the Association, the Court recorded, inter alia, that applications were being filed from time to time by flat owners for execution of deeds of conveyance and directed the suit to go out of the list with liberty to mention.
The said order is of considerable relevance. It demonstrates that the proceedings have, over the years, provided the juridical framework within which individual owners or persons claiming through them have approached this Court for completion of the conveyancing process pertaining to their respective units.
A similar application was thereafter made by Mrs. Geeta Bhasin, being G.A. No. 736 of 2019, seeking, inter alia, leave to intervene in the suit under Order I Rule 8 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, leave to serve the Everest Owners' Association, appointment of a Special Officer for execution and registration of the conveyance relating to Flat No. 19B on the 19th floor of Everest Building, and consequential directions upon the Registrar of Assurances.
By order dated 24 June 2019, this Court directed publication of notice in Ananda Bazar Patrika Sunday edition and Telegraph Sunday edition. Thereafter, by order dated 30 August 2019, the Hon'ble Justice Shekhar B. Saraf appointed Mr. Sachidananda Pandey, Advocate, as Special Officer to execute and register the necessary deed of conveyance in respect of Flat No. 19B in favour of the nominees of the petitioner.
The said Special Officer thereafter executed and registered the deed of conveyance in favour of the nominee of the applicant in terms of the order dated 30 August 2019.
The record further discloses that by orders dated 8 April 2024 in G.A. No. 100 of 2024 and 15 July 2024 in G.A. No. 99 of 2024, this Court again directed publication in newspapers in relation to the respective applications concerning units in Everest Building.
By order dated 15 July 2024, the Hon'ble Justice Bivas Pattanayak was pleased, inter alia, to appoint Mr. Somnath Saha, Advocate, as Special Officer for execution and registration of the necessary deed of conveyance in respect of Office Flat No. 9G on the 9th floor of Everest House, in favour of the nominee of the petitioner.
The Special Officer so appointed subsequently executed and registered the deed of conveyance in favour of the nominee of the applicant.
The aforesaid history is not adverted to as a substitute for adjudication of the applicant's individual entitlement. It is noticed for the limited purpose of appreciating the procedural course adopted by this Court in relation to similarly situated owners of units in the same building and within the same representative proceedings.
The applicant's case is that although the original owners acquired possession pursuant to the letter dated 31 January 1979, a deed of conveyance in favour of the original owner in respect of the concerned unit has not, owing to the circumstances narrated in the application, been executed and registered.
The applicant now proposes to transfer Unit No. 18G, admeasuring approximately 2000 square feet, to Gayson & Company Private Limited, pursuant to an agreement dated 25 June 2025.
The applicant has stated that Gayson & Company Private Limited is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, having its registered office at 6G, Everest House, 46C, Chowringhee Road, Kolkata–700071, and that the proposed transfer is in favour of the said company as the nominee of the applicant.
It has further been stated that the trustees of the Seth Chiranji Lal Khaitan Trust, under the terms of the Trust Deed, are authorised to sell, transfer or otherwise deal with the properties of the Trust and that Mr. Sunay Krishna Khaitan was specifically authorised by resolution dated 18 March 2025 to do all acts necessary for effecting the proposed sale.
The said agreement dated 25 June 2025 and the resolution dated 18 March 2025 have been placed on record.
The applicant thereafter addressed a letter dated 26 June 2025 to the Everest Owners Association seeking confirmation that its name stood recorded as owner of Unit No. 18G and requesting issuance of a no-objection certificate and confirmation regarding outstanding dues.
By its letter dated 2 July 2025, the Everest Owners Association confirmed that the applicant's name was recorded as owner of Unit No. 18G, that there were no outstanding dues and that the Association had no objection to the proposed sale of the office space to Gayson & Company Private Limited upon obtaining the necessary permission of this Court.
The applicant has also stated that, having regard to the earlier orders passed by this Court directing publication in newspapers in similar matters, it is ready and willing to undertake the requisite publication in respect of the present application.
The applicant seeks leave to intervene in the suit under Order I Rule 8 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The nature of the intervention sought, however, requires some precision. The applicant does not seek to displace the plaintiff, alter the character of the representative proceedings or introduce a competing cause of action. The intervention is sought for the limited and consequential purpose of obtaining the benefit of the mechanism which this Court has previously employed for completion of conveyances concerning units in the Everest Building.
Order I Rule 8 embodies a procedural device intended to permit adjudication of a common interest through representative proceedings.
The decree in a representative suit binds the persons represented, subject to the safeguards prescribed by the Rule.
In the present case, the applicant's interest lies in obtaining formal conveyance of the unit which it claims to own and in completing the consequential transaction with its proposed nominee. The applicant does not seek to alter the lis between the existing parties. The proposed intervention is therefore capable of being accommodated within the existing representative framework without converting the application into a separate substantive contest.
A draft deed of conveyance has been placed on record by the applicant through a supplementary affidavit. The Court has perused the draft instrument.
It identifies the proposed parties, records the authority of their respective representatives and incorporates the title history relied upon by the applicant.
The power of the Court must, however, be exercised with appropriate safeguards. The proposed conveyance cannot be permitted to travel beyond the title and rights which the applicant is entitled to convey, nor can registration be directed in a manner which dispenses with statutory requirements relating to stamp duty, registration, identification, execution or presentation.
The applicant has also placed before the Court the confirmation of the Everest Owners Association that the applicant's name is recorded as owner of Unit No. 18G, that no dues remain outstanding and that the Association has no objection to the proposed transfer subject to permission of this Court.
The course adopted in the earlier applications relating to other units of Everest Building, coupled with the publication directed in those proceedings, persuades this Court that a similar safeguard ought to accompany the present order.
The Court is also conscious that the applicant seeks permission to intervene without being formally transposed as a party to the suit. In the peculiar circumstances of the present case, such formal transposition is not necessary for the limited purpose for which intervention is sought. The applicant's participation may remain confined to the present application and to the consequential acts required for completion of the conveyance.
No prejudice is caused to the existing plaintiff by such limited intervention. On the contrary, the applicant's interest substantially coincides with the common interest represented in the suit in relation to completion of the conveyancing process concerning the Everest Building.
The balance of convenience also lies in favour of permitting the proposed course. The applicant has placed before the Court the agreement for sale, the resolution authorising the proposed transaction, the Association's confirmation, the previous orders passed by this Court and, significantly, the draft deed of conveyance itself.
The proposed purchaser has also been identified with sufficient particularity in the draft instrument. The transaction is therefore not speculative in character. What remains is the completion of a formal legal act of conveyance through the mechanism of the Court, subject to the safeguards herein prescribed.
The Court accordingly finds that the prayers in the application merit acceptance.
G.A. No. 107 of 2025 is allowed.
The applicant has caused publication of notice of the proposed conveyance in newspapers vide earlier order passed by this Court. However, no objection to the same had been raised constructively. An affidavit of compliance of such paper publication has been filed.
The draft deed of conveyance placed on record through the supplementary affidavit is taken on record and shall form the basis of the deed to be executed and registered in respect of Unit No. 18G in favour of Gayson & Company Private Limited.
The draft deed is approved in principle for execution, subject to the corrections and modifications necessary to incorporate the particulars required for lawful execution and registration and to give effect to this order.
A Special Officer, appointed earlier by this Court is further appointed for the purpose of executing and presenting the deed of conveyance for registration in respect of Unit No. 18G, Everest Building, 46C, Jawaharlal Nehru Road, Kolkata–700071, in favour of Gayson & Company Private Limited.
The Special Officer shall execute the conveyance on behalf of Western Building Corporation, in accordance with the authority conferred by this Court, and shall take all consequential steps necessary for presentation and registration of the instrument.
The Special Officer shall be entitled to incorporate in the draft deed such amendments as are clerical, consequential or necessitated by the requirements of the registering authority, provided that no such alteration shall enlarge the substantive rights of either party or introduce a term inconsistent with the material placed before this Court.
The applicant and the proposed Purchaser shall furnish to the Special Officer all documents necessary for establishing their respective identity, authority and capacity to execute the proposed transaction.
Mr. Sunay Krishna Khaitan, as trustee of the Seth Chiranji Lal Khaitan Trust, shall furnish to the Special Officer the Trust Deed and the resolution dated 18 March 2025, together with such other documents as may be necessary to establish his authority to act on behalf of the Trust.
The proposed Purchaser shall furnish to the Special Officer the Board Resolution dated 19 December 2024 authorising Mr. Chetan Aggarwala to execute and register the conveyance on behalf of Gayson & Company Private Limited.
The Special Officer shall verify that the description of the property in the final instrument corresponds with Unit No. 18G situated on the 18th floor of Everest Building at 46C, Jawaharlal Nehru Road, Kolkata–700071, together with the appurtenant rights lawfully transferable therewith.
The Special Officer shall thereafter proceed with execution of the conveyance.
The Registrar of Assurances, Kolkata, or the competent registering authority, shall, upon presentation of the deed duly executed in terms of this order, receive and process the same in accordance with law and, subject to compliance with the statutory requirements concerning stamp duty, registration fees, identity, execution and presentation, proceed with registration thereof.
Nothing contained in this order shall be construed as dispensing with any mandatory statutory requirement applicable to the execution or registration of the conveyance.
The Special Officer shall thereafter file a report before this Court recording the completion of execution and registration and shall annex thereto a copy of the registered deed of conveyance.
The appointment of the Special Officer shall stand discharged upon filing of the aforesaid report, subject to any further direction that may be required for completion of the ministerial acts arising from the registration.
It is clarified that the present order is confined to facilitate the conveyance of Unit No. 18G in the circumstances placed before the Court. It shall not be construed as an adjudication of any independent title dispute not arising for determination in the present application.
The applicant shall remain bound by the statements and documents upon which the present order has proceeded. The execution of the conveyance pursuant to this order shall operate within the title and interest lawfully available to be conveyed.
G.A. No. 107 of 2025 is accordingly disposed of.
There shall be no order as to costs.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties on priority basis on compliance of all formalities.