S.Majumder, Member.

This Revision Application has been directed against the order dated 15.09.2008, passed by the 24-Parganas (south), in its case no-CC-126/2008, whereby the Ld. Forum below has passed an order restraining the OPs and their agents if any, from transferring and or registering the garage spaces in Purba Abasan until further order.

The fact of the case of the Complainants before the Forum below was that they were provided a car parking space in the Purba Abasan against payment of Rs.1,75,000/- in several installments, but they became aggrieved as to the size and dimension of the covered car parking space, allotted to them. The Complainants took measurements of the garage space and were astonished to find the entrance to the car parking space no-7 is only 69” (sixty-nine inches) but the other adjacent and similar car parking spaces which were found to be 110”. The allegation of the Complainants is that a standard Ambassador car measuring 65”in width and it is apparent that entering of an Ambassador car in the allotted car parking space is virtually impossible and it is equally difficult to take out  any car. Therefore the said car parking space is totally unusable and not according to the specification of a garage space in terms of the Kolkata municipal Corporation Rules and totally not in conformity with the Building Rules and also discriminatory as against the other car parking spaces situate in the said Block as well as discriminatory in nature. The Complainants have prayed for alternative arrangements for a proper garage space as allotted to other incumbents of the said building.

Being dissatisfied with the above-mentioned order the Revision Petitioner-OP-2 has preferred this present revision Petition contending that the Petitioner being the OP-2 before the Forum below duly filed the objection against the petition of complaint and while the matter was in progress for final hearing the Complainant no-1 and 2 filed an application without serving any copy and as such the present Petitioner could not get a chance to file any objection to the same. Filing the said application the Complainant- 1 and 2 prayed for an injunction and ad-interim order. It is pertinent to mention that an application was filed before the Ld. Forum below to expunge the names of the OP-2 as he had no role in the said complaint, but the Forum below was not pleased to allow the said application filed by the OP-2and rejected the same on 15.09.2008. On the same date the Forum has passed the above-mentioned order, against which the Petitioner has preferred this Revision Application and according to the Petitioner the said order being illegal and erroneous cannot be sustained. The Petitioner has also prayed for to grant interim stay over the said order in the interest of all the inhabitants of the said Abasan.

Against the Revision Petition the OP no-1 and 2 have raised objection in writing. The grievance of the OP-1 and 2 is that the garage allotted to them being no-7 though is of proper size but its entrance being little narrow, the vehicle of a proper size cannot enter the garage.

            During hearing before this Commission on 03.10.2008 an interim order was passed to the extent that registration may be completed of all the garages except the garage no-1, 2 and 7 and a further interim order restraining all the parties to the proceeding from altering garage no- 1, 2 and 7 as also space between the garage no- 1 and 2 until further order. On 10.11.2008 during the course of argument it appeared that the dispute boiled down to the question as to whether an ambassador car can be kept in the car parking space no-7 allotted to the OP-1 and 2. As the parties were differing in opinion we appointed Mr. Subrata Mondal, Ld. Advocate as an Advocate Commissioner to inspect the locale and to find as to whether an Ambassador car can be conveniently kept in the said garage. The inspection was held in the presence of the Advocates of the parties on 10.11.2008. After the said inspection an inspection report has been filed by Sri. Subrata Mondal, Ld. Advocate Commissioner on 11.11.2008 stating that there is 9.6” (one side 7.6’’ and other side 2”) gap when an Ambassador (Taxi) is going into the said garage space. But if the car drive straight way there is some obstruction by the cover duct/pillar as from cover duct to other pillar measurement is 70” inch and if the car drive curve way there will be some free access into the garage and the measuring curve way is 74.6’’ inch. During hearing the Ld. Advocate for the Complainants-1 and 2 submitted that if an Ambassador Car can enter into the said garage through the entrance, they have no problem and it has been also submitted by the said Advocate that regarding space in to the garage they have no objection. The Ld. Advocate Commissioner has submitted that the garage allotted to the Complainants is a big one and after keeping their Ambassador there is sufficient space in the garage. From the aforementioned report it is clear to us that there is no such problem for entering an Ambassador in to the garage through the entrance as there is total 9.6” inch gap in the both sides. As the car is entering into the garage, we are inclined to vacate the injunction and ad-interim order passed by the Ld. Forum below on 15.09.2008 being unjust and improper.

Hence it is ordered that the Revision Petition be allowed on contest; however, considering the facts and circumstances there is no order as to cost. The order passed by the Ld. Forum below on 15.09.2008 is set aside. With the above observation the Revision Petition be disposed of accordingly. The office is directed to issue the copy of this order to the recorded Advocates of all the parties free of cost forthwith.