| the calcutta high court both the learned single judge as well as the division bench committed serious error of law in directing the receiver to take possession of nalban fishery from the state of west bengal and deliver the vacant possession of the same to the members of the sarkar family. the nalban fishery was one of the items of property in the suit for partition is not disputed. it is also not disputed that the state of west bengal though was not a party to the suit but in course of proceeding before this court by an order of the court the said state of west bengal was impleaded as a party. the aforesaid order directing impleadment of the state of west bengal as a 7 party was obviously intended for the purpose that the interest of the state and the rights of the state in relation of the state and the rights of the state in relation of the state and the rights of the state in relation to several fisheries could be protected. further while directing the receiver to handover possession of the various fisheries covered by the final decree to the parties to whom they have been allotted under the decree this court also protected the interest of the state by observing that they made it quite clear that this will not in any manner prejudice or affect the right of the state to its claim over the fisheries under the west bengal acquisition act 1955 or under any other statute. it is an undisputed fact that nalban fishery had been requisitioned much prior to the aforesaid decree of this court and therefore the rights of the state to the fishery either by virtue of the requisition order or by virtue of any provision of any other statute remained protected and as such said state of west bengal ca nt be bound down by the so called allotment of fisheries in favour of some members of the sarkar family under the compromise decree in question. the district magistrate 24 parganas who was appointed as receiver took possession of several fisheries including nalban fishery obviously on the impression that the lease in respect of the said fishery which had been granted by the sarkar family had lapsed. the said receiver was not aware of the fact that nalban fishery had in fact requisitioned by the state of west bengal and the state is in possession of the same. the successor receiver in the circumstances therefore was fully justified in bringing it to the notice of this court by giving a second report indicating therein that his predecessor had erroneously taken the possession of nalban fishery which is in contravention of the directions of this court and for which the receiver offered his unconditional apology. the court did not find any illegality in the act of the succeeding receiver in rectifying the earlier mistake and re delivering the possession of nalban fishery to the state of west bengal. the aforesaid order can not be held to operate as res judicata taking away the rights of the state of west bengal in respect of the nalban fishery as the state was not a party to the proceedings. the rights and interest of the state of west bengal was not in any way be affected by the so called partition and allotment of the nalban fishery inter se amongst the members of the sarkar family the order passed by the learned single judge of the calcutta high court will not stand on the way of the state in claiming and putting forth its interest and right over the nalban fishery. |