51. That after failure in said attempt, said Chuni Lal Mukherjee the member of said Mafiadom, decided to
cause some pressure by encroaching the properties of the Petitioner, as Petitioner send Lawyers Notice to said Chuni Lal Mukherjee,
son of Late R. G. Mukherjee, the then resident of 11, Banmali Naskar Road, Kolkata-700034, against his intentions to encroach
the properties of the Petitioner. After receipt of the said Notice he under connivance with the concerned Police Officer changed
strategy and lodged one Criminal Case that Milap Chand Choraria (the Petitioner herein) demanded Rs.20,000/- from him, with
object to get arrested him, when the Petitioner come to restrain him from encroaching the property of the Petitioner. But,
when Petitioner taken appropriate steps against him, for time being, under advice from the said Mafia Sanjay Kumar Jhunjhunwala
he decided to stop such activities against the Petitioner, and on 6th February 1986, admitted in writing that the
Criminal Case filed by him was untrue.
52. That thereafter said Sanjay Kumar Jhunjhunwala tried to develop personal rapo with the Petitioner, even
some time with fraudulently claiming that he is going to Golf Club, dropped the Petitioner at his residence. But object of
such action were to develop connections with the alleged other members of the Petitioner’s Cooperative Society, who
were living in the same building. Thereafter, he meets secretly with the Tenants of the Petitioner and said them that they
cannot win the Court cases against the Petitioner. So, if they want to live on the properties, they should send to the Petitioner,
in the hell. Thereafter, a plot was hatched by the said Mafiadom to kill the Petitioner and accordingly on about 18th
July 1986 a severe attempt to murder of the Petitioner was committed, in which Petitioner suffered 42 stabs in his body. Thereafter,
this was reported by some one that the then Area Councilor Mr. Bhola Nath Mukherjee, 341/4, Diomond Harbour Road, Kolkata-700038
on behalf of Said Mafia Sanjay Kumar Jhunjhunwala gratified the Police Official, and arranged bail of one of such person attempted
to murder the Petitioner. As such on 8th October 1986 the Petitioner send his protest Letter to said Shri Bhola
Nath Mukherjee, the then area Councilor, with copy to Police against his support to murderer.
53. That when the petitioner was in Hospital, said Mafia leader Sanjay Kumar Jhunjhunwala came to Hospital
claiming as a curtsey call to know about the health of the Petitioner, but his object was different, which at that moment
Petitioner not realised. During the said visit he informed that he has one friend in the Telegraph and ask him to publish
one story related to attempt to murder of the Petitioner. However, on those days one regular feature under the heading "CALCUTTA
ROUNDUP" was published. In the said feature one Tapash Kumar Chakraborty published several stories relates to crime matters.
On 6th October 1986 one News Item was published in the Telegraph’s said fixed Feature under heading "CALCUTTA
ROUNDUP", with the specific heading for specific News item "Antisocials terrorise slumdwellers".
54. That the Petitioner was not reader of any English Newspaper, as such the said News was come to his notice
only on 22nd October 1986. After going by the said News Petitioner send a strong protest Letter to Mr. Aveek Sarkar,
Chief Editor of Ananda Bazar Patrika Group of Newspapers (In the letter by mistake Petitioner referred him as Chief Reporter),
Mr. M. J. Akbar, the then Editor of the Telegraph, Mr. Pabitra Kumar Mukherjee, the then Publisher and Publisher of the Telegraph,
said Reporter Mr. Tapash Kumar Chakraborty, with a copy to the Officer-in-Charge, Behala Police Station all by Registered
Post, describing the said news as "ULTA CHOR KOTWAL KO DANTEY", and after giving detail facts requested thereby that
"So this is my humble request through the Telegraph to the Government, that for justice to all, allegations of the residents
with regards to alleged incidents of 18th July 1986 and 29th August 1986 as published in the Telegraph
and Behala P. S. Case Nos. 91(`12)83, 106(2)84, 4(3)84 and 67(7)86 and my allegations of blackmailing and criminal conspiracy
against us should be handed over to C. B. I. for proper investigation and actions, so actual criminals would be punished."
After receipt of the said letter Petitioner does not know what actions were taken by the management of the Telegraph, but
for a long period the name of said Yellow Journalist Mr. Tapash Kumar Chakraborty were disappear from the Telegraph.
55. Thereafter, under further criminal conspiracy to blackmail and to cause heavy pressure upon the Petitioner,
under a long term blackmailing strategy the said Mafiadom got obtained a letter, allegedly have been written by the Petitioner’s
Ejected Tenants (Who vacated the respective Rooms, when in Execution proceedings, the Order was Passed for Execution of Decreed
passed against respective Tenants, then the aforesaid themselves admitted before the Learned Court recording their admission
in Court proceedings Police is not required to depute and they will vacate the respective Rooms, within the Period of Order)
the then inhabitants of the said R. S. Plot No. 206. But, in the said letter this was described that the Petitioner is a dreaded
criminal and removed the aforesaid Tenants by force. After going through the said created letter Petitioner understood that
the story referred therein is totally false and frivolous as such he taken no care. This is needless to mentioned here that
the said Letter was forwarded by said Mafia Leader Sanjay Kumar Jhunjhunwala send Letter by his covering Letter dated 5th
August 1986, immediately after returning of the Petitioner from the Hospital on 31st July 1986.
56. However, Petitioner through his Advocate on records, wanted to know that who was behind the letter, as
such when, aforesaid Tenants as a good gesture come to residence of the Petitioner to know about his health after attempt
to murder, he shown the said letter, those (ejected) Tenants not only surprised, but declared that the Thumb impression of
them are forged and even spelling of the Name of some tenants are not correct. As such Petitioner ask the said Mafia Sanjay
Kumar Jhunjhunwala about authenticity of the Letter, which was never given. However, considering non-impact of the said created
and false letter said Mafia Sanjay Kumar Jhunjhunwala developed and created another false and concocted story and informed
the same to the Petitioner. From such developments, in the mind of the Petitioner doubt was started about the said Mafia Sanjay
Kumar Jhunjhunwala that he himself might be behind the scene and possibility he himself directly may be involved in the Plot
to kill the Petitioner, which subsequently was confirmed on private enquiry. However, as such Petitioner created a Pressure
upon said Sanjay Kumar Jhunjhunwala that either he will disconnect his connections with him, or otherwise he should put the
information he said to him which contained threats with the name of the Police Commissioner of Kolkata. As such said Mafia
Sanjay Kumar Jhunjhunwala confirmed the said new but fake story in writing by his letter dated 5th November 1986.
57. In fact by the said fake story said Mafia Sanjay Kumar Jhunjhunwala wanted to convey his threats that
the Petitioner will be removed from the Properties with the help of the then Commissioner of Kolkata Police Mr. B. K. Basu.
This is needless to be mentioned here that respective property was not within the area of the Kolkata Police rather within
the area of West Bengal Police. On the basis of the said Letter Petitioner requested the then Police Commissioner of Kolkata
Mr. Bikas Kali Basu, IPS that since his name is dragged in the story, he should find out the alleged Advocate, but action
was not taken in the matter by the then Police Commissioner of Kolkata Mr. Bikas Kali Basu, IPS. Upon the enquiries the alleged
Mahamadan advocate never surfaced in four corners of any Court in Kolkata, or neighboring Courts, as the story was completely
fake and created by the said Mafia Sanjay Kumar Jhunjhunwala. But, from the said letter, this was become crystal clear that
said Mafia Sanjay Kumar Jhunjhunwala has close connections with very powerful politicians and bureaucrats.
58. That in the said year of 1986, when attempt to murder of the Petitioner failed Shri Jyoti Basu the then
Chief Minister of West Bengal instructed to Shri Kamal Kumar Basu the then Mayor of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation to help
one adjudged and habitual Cheat Chittaranjan Ganguly and his pattern said Mafia Sanjay Kumar Jhunjhunwala. Accordingly, under
a long strategy to blackmail the Petitioner, on 14th November 1986, Kolkata Municipal Corporation created a fake
Municipal Holding Number as 161 Vinoba Bhave Road, Ward No.119 Kolkata-700038, in favour of said adjudged Cheat Chittaranjan
Ganguly. This is matter of great concerns that much before creation of such fake Municipal Holding number, said Mafia Sanjay
Kumar Jhunjhunwala informed by his said Letter dated 5th November 1986 to the Petitioner in writing that Municipal
Holding is exists in the name of said adjudged Cheat Chittaranjan Ganguly, which is evidence of the crime that said Mafia
Sanjay Kumar Jhunjhunwala was behind the scene in the matter and his strong Nexus in the matter.
59. Thereafter, under the aforesaid long strategy to blackmail to the Petitioner, Kolkata Municipal Corporation
revoked two sanctioned plans of the Petitioner on the false grounds that he obtained sanctions of the Building Plans under
misrepresentations about the ownership. When Petitioner moved before Hon’ble Kolkata High Court, the said Order of Kolkata
Municipal Corporation was set-aside.
60. That under the said long strategy to blackmail the Petitioner, Kolkata Municipal Corporation once again
revoked the said two Plans on the further false interalia grounds that respective Land has no passage for igress or ingress.
Before passing the said Order by the Kolkata Municipal Corporation, Shri Kamal Basu the then Mayor of Kolkata Municipal Corporation
called the Petitioner through one Councilor Shri Shanti Lal Jain and informed and conveyed the Petitioner that if he wants
to live in Kolkata, he should transfer the property to the Sanjay Kumar Jhunjhunwala. In respect of the subsequent Order of
Revocation of the Plans, Hon’ble Kolkata High Court directed to Kolkata Municipal Corporation to withdraw its illegal
Second Order of revocation of plan.
61. That as the said Mafia Sanjay Kumar Jhunjhunwala and his associates including Chuni Lal Mukherjee made
long strategy to blackmail the Petitioner through various flimsy litigations, they attracted the Vendors of the Petitioners
to join with them. This fact is confirmed from one letter received by the Petitioner from the Grand Daughter of said Vendor
Ava Rani Dey and Daughter of Dipika Rani Bhattacharjee namely Mrs. Ratna Bhattacharjee, of 10/10, Kali Charan Dutta Road,
62. That from the said letter of Mrs. Ratna Bhattacharjee, this was also confirmed that said Chuni Lal Mukherjee,
as associate of said Mafia Leader was in regular touch with the Vendors of the Petitioner and under their strategy to blackmail
the Petitioner got filed a Civil Suit against the Petitioner through his aforesaid Vendors namely Ava Rani Dey and Dipika
Rani Bhattacharjee, completely based on false claim. As it was already explained in detailed that total area measurement of
the respective properties was 66 Cottas, including 10 cottas, over which said Ava Rani Dey and Dipaika rani Bhattacharyya
lost their claim.
63. That Ava Rani Dey and Dipika Rani Bhattacharjee have lost their claim over properties comprised at R.S.Plot
No.219 measuring more or less 10 Cottas, because Civil Court held that Deed Executed by the Balaram Pal was not "legs to
stand" as he was not the Owner of the Properties referred in Suit Khatian as well as of the Suit Land of the said Suit,
i.e. R.S. Plot No.219 as aforesaid and Court decided ownership of the said Suit Land on the basis of the document admitted
by all parties to the Suit, i.e. "Records of Rights", being a valid document under the prevailing Law, if not challenged
within limited prescribed period from the date of its publication, by the authority. According to the respective Records
of Rights said properties measuring more or less 10 Cottas of land was in forcible possession of the legal heirs of one Rabindra
Lal Chakraborty. Said Ava Rani Dey and Dipika Rani Bhattacharjee admitted in their plaint that they sold 35 cottas of land
to the Petitioner. Without admitting and prejuding his rights, just for arguement sake, Petitioner submit that therefore,
out of 56 Cottas of land if any dispute was pending, that cannot go beyond the landed properties measuring more or less 21
cottas, comprised in R. S. Plot No. 195 and 206 as aforesaid. But, in the Suit, with clear objectives to blackmail the Petitioner
by misusing the platform of the "Administration of Justice", the area of the properties by manipulating 6 C. S. Plots
with 6 Corresponding R. S. Plots, but without clarifying them as C. S. Plots or R. S. Plots referred as 12 individual Plots,
and virtually Injunction was sought over entire properties including sold properties and properties covered by the law of
ResJudicata, as they lost their Suit finally up to Kolkata High Court, and referred aforesaid properties under manipulations
as 94 cottas. This was a severe Crime under Section 340 of the Criminal Procedure Code, provided respective Judicial Officer
could have acted judiciously, since this was a strong and open evidence of the blackmailing by misusing the Administration
64. That Learned Presiding Officer of the Court of the 5th Munsif, Alipore Mr. J. C. Moulick,
was under embracement of the said Mafiadom, as such passed Injunction Order against the Petitioner, in a matter which admittedly
was based on clear manipulations. As such the Petitioner filed Appeal against the Injunction Order of the Learned Court of
the Munsif. At the first instance of hearing of Appeal, Learned Additional District Judge Mr. A.K. Chowdhury, made comment
in open Court that in considerations of such manipulations he will return (reject) the Plaint of the Suit at limini and going
to pass order to that effect. But, the reasons best known to him he withheld passing of the order for few days. When he passed
the Order, under most surprisingly he upheld the said injunction order passed by the Court of the 5th Munsif, Alipore.
As such Petitioner filed Revision Application before the Hon’ble Kolkata High Court. At the 1st instance
of hearing Hon’ble Court satisfied that the Order of the Munsif was unjustified as such agreed to set-aside the same.
At this stage the Senior Lawyer of the Petitioner Learned Mr. Shakti Nath Mukherjee, Bar-at-law argued that in considerations
of the manipulations contained in the plaint he wants to place complete argument in the matter enable to Hon’ble Court
to pass a Rule to reject / return of the Plaint. Hon’ble Court agreed with the aforesaid argument and fixed the matter
for final hearing. Under development of such adverse situation against the blackmailing objects, the Advocate of the said
Mafiadom started to influence the Advocate-on-record of the Petitioner Mr. Gouri Shankar Gupta, Advocate.
65. That initially Mr. Gouri Shankar Gupta, Advocate suggested the Petitioner for some compromise. When Mr.
Gupta received negative response from the Petitioner, he entered in underhand criminal agreement with the opposite Party,
as such one day when matter was called for hearing, and even Hon’ble Judge was ready to Passover the matter to hear
the matter from Ld. Mr. Shakti Nath Mukherjee, Bar-at-law, who also send message for Passover of the matter, as he was busy
in another Court with other matter, but, under the aforesaid underhand criminal agreement Mr. Gouri Shankar Gupta, Advocate
even ignoring strong objections from the Petitioner, moved the matter through another Lawyer and submitted knowing fully incompetent
arguments. As a result, the same Order was passed by the Hon’ble High Court, which Hon’ble Court was ready to
pass earlier after initial hearing of the Petition. The order of the Munsif was set aside and matter was returned for further
66. That earlier Order was passed under the embracement of influence, by the self-same presiding Officer
of the Learned Court of the Munsif Mr. J.C. Moulick who once again passed injunction Order against the Petitioner Overruling
16 different Rulings given by the different High Courts and further over ruling the principles laid down by the Supreme Court
for granting of the Injunction Orders. At the time of hearing of the Injunction Order Petitioner pleaded in writing that since
he is defendant in the Suit, so his argument may not be considered as bonafide, but the documents filed by the Plaintiffs
of the said Suit Ava Rani Dey and Dipika Rani should be taken into consideration for the passing the Order of Injunction Application.
Since the documents referred therein by the said Plaintiff have shown the complete area with regards to the aforesaid 6 Plots
just as 66 Cottas, including aforesaid 10 Cottas of Land over which Ava Rani Dey and Dipika Rani Bhattacharjee lost their
all rights, claim and 35 cottas of land which they themselves admitted as sold to the Petitioner. But, the Presiding Officer
of the Learned Court of 5th Munsif Mr. J.C.Moulick, was under embracement, as such ignoring all 16 Rulings of different
High Courts, documents referred and filed by the Plaintiff themselves, passed injunction order against the Petitioner giving
flimsy grounds that "court cannot embark upon at this stage" for not relying upon the documents filed by the Plaintiff.
67. That in considerations of such acts and Deeds Petitioner filed Complaints before Bar Council of West
Bengal against Mr. Tapash Kumar Sarkar, Advocate of the said Ava Rani Dey and Dipika Rani Bhattacharjee and lodged Prosecution
Permission Petitions against Learned Mr. J.C. Moulick, the then Presiding Officer of the Learned Court of Munsif and Learned
Mr. A.K.Choudhury, the then Presiding Officer of the Additional District Judge, Alipore.
68. That in any case, without admitting and prejudice his rights, just for argument sake this is the submission
of the Petitioner that, as per the document admitted by the aforesaid plaintiffs and their admission about 35 cottas of land
and under law of Resjudicata in respect of 10 Copttas of land over which those plaintiff lost their Suit, even if there were
any dispute that could have been with regards to payment in respect of properties more or less 21 Cottas comprised in R. S.
Plot No. 195 and 206. Therefore, the plaintiff if could have filed a suit against the Petitioner, i.e. could have been limited
to payment of the properties measuring 21 Cottas of aforesaid R. S. Plots. But as stated hereinbefore the object of the said
Suit was to blackmail the Petitioner and Learned Mr. J. C. Moulick, the then Presiding Officer of the Court of 5th
Munsif, Alipore, was under complete embracement to help the aforesaid blackmailing activities, thus committed Contempt of
his own Court by Over Ruling 16 Rulings of different High Courts and ignoring the evidence relied upon by the Plaintiff themselves
of the suit, and further ignoring the directions passed by the Hon’ble Mr. Justice A. K.Nandi, of Kolkata High Court,
just giving flimsy grounds that "court cannot embark upon at this stage" for not relying upon the documents filed by the Plaintiff,
and passed order of injunction order against the Petitioner.
69. That as stated hereinbefore, said Mafiadom intended to open different fronts of litigations to cause
heavy pressure upon the petitioner, as such when Attempt to murder took place said Mafia Leader Sanjay Kumar Jhunjhunwala
went several times at the Hospital to know about the health of the Petitioner, where he succeed to develop connections with
one Shrawan Kumar Bhatter, who also booked the Flat with the Petitioner. When Petitioner after release from the Hospital come
to residence, said Shrawan Kumar Bhatter along with his father Shankar Lal Bhatter meet with the Petitioner and said that
when Sanjay Kumar Jhunjhunwala interested to purchase the property, why he is not selling it to him, when he is ready to give
good money. When Petitioner refused to accept such proposal, said Shrawan Kumar Bhatter and his father Shankar Lal Bhatter
started to meet each person, who booked flats with the Petitioner and made promoters in his Cooperative Society, so he can
create pressure upon the Petitioner taking advantage of the Membership of the said Cooperative Society. This is matter of
fact that till then, starting from 1982, said Shrawan Kumar Bhatter or Shankar Lal Bhatter never go to the property, as they
have to do nothing with it as it was belongs to the Petitioner, they have just booked the Flats and then were entitled to
get their respective flats, on the terms and conditions agreed upon between both side. But, when the said Mafia advice them
to took advantage of the Membership to create pressure upon the Petitioner to compel him to sell the properties to him, they
under some huge amount of offer, decided to misuse the card of membership.
70. That in the meantime, Petitioner got sanction of Plan and called a Special general meeting of the society
to confirm the Allotment of the plan’s Flats and comprehensive plan with regards to properties, as such a Special General
Meeting of the Cooperative Society was held on 6th September 1986 in accordance with the agenda of the said Meeting
and Allotments were made from northern side proposed Building in favour of 15 persons considering the required area of each
person and flats of Southern side building were allotted in favour of 8 Members in considerations of their requirements. In
those two building each and every proposed Flats were allotted in favour of all 23 (except the Petitioner) Members. The said
two Building has to be constructed at the Properties comprised at said R. S. Plot No. 205. In accordance with the agenda and
proposal, the tenanted properties comprised in R. S. Plot No. 194 were allotted in favour of the Petitioner. 17 Members, including
Raj Kumar Dhawan and his Son Chandra Sekhar Dhawan, attended the Special General Meeting. Out of rest 7 Members 2 Members
telephoned to the Petitioner informing the reason of not coming to meeting, while Five Persons namely Sushil Kumar Bhatter,
Shrawan Kumar Bhatter, Ashok Kumar Bhatter (Three brothers from the single joint family), Prabhu Dayal Sureka and Sushil Kumar
Tulsian informed the Petitioner that they are interested in Allotment, but are interested to see the sale of the property
to said Mafia Sanjay Kumar Jhunjhunwala, as such decisively not attended the said Meeting.