Item No. 04 & 05 Ct 22 rup 22.05. 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE SMAT 4 of 2024 IA No: CAN 1 of 2024 CAN 2 of 2025 With SMAT 5 of 2024 IA NO: CAN 1 of 2025 CAN 2 of 2025 Ganguly Evera Developers LLP Vs Anirban Baidya & Anr. Mr. Saptansu Basu, Sr. Adv. Mr. Supratim Dhar, Sr. adv. Mr. Dhananjay Nayak. … for the appellant. Mr. Chandra Sekhar Banerjee, Mr. Shanit Dutta, Mr. Soumyo Banerjee. … for the respondent no.1. Mr. Anirban Ray, Sr. Adv. Mr. Raja Saha Mr. Sanjay Mukherjee. Ms. Bahnidipa Roy … for the respondent no.2 1. Affidavit of service filed by the appellant be kept with the record. 2. Whereas these companion appeals, intertwined in their genesis and identical in their core contentions, having sprouted from the self-same proceeding, do hereby warrant harmonious consideration and concurrent determination via this common order. 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties to these appeals are present. 4. Appellant as well as respondent No.1 filed a joint compromise petition on the terms and conditions mentioned therein. 5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent no.2/ RERA is present and submits that he has nothing to submit if the dispute between the parties is patched up by filing the compromise petition. 6. The dispute arose in these appeals on a complaint submitted by the respondent no.1 herein. 7. Both the parties to these revisional applications are present. 8. The issue cropped up between the parties after demise of one of the grantors of the power of attorney admittedly executed in favour of one Monoj Roy who, in turn, sold the subject property in favour of one Sardev Infracom Pvt. Ltd.. The Sardev Infracom Pvt. Ltd. subsequently executed a registered development agreement with Ganguly Evera Developers LLP./appellant herein. 9. The complaint filed by the respondent no.1 challenging the transfer of the property through power of attorney while one of the grantors already died. At this stage surviving grantor/respondent No.1 herein has entered into a compromise with the 2 appellant who is also not willing to proceed with these appeals 10. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent no.1 has submitted that necessary liberty be given to withdraw the written complaint submitted before the respondent no.2/RERA Authority in terms of compromise held between the parties. 11. Respondent No.1 is at liberty to withdraw the written complaint submitted before the RERA Authority which put the RERA Authority to initiate a proceeding being No.WBRERA/REVOCATION 01 of 2024, without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the legal heirs of the Kalyani Baidya/one of the grantors, since deceased, if any. 12. With the aforesaid observation, the appeals and connected applications stand disposed of. 13. Urgent photostat certified copy of the order, if applied for, be given to the parties on usual undertakings. 14. All parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. (Bibhas Ranjan De, J.) 3