Item- A- 825. sg 02-09-2026 Ct. 6 CO 590 of 2026 Sabita Karmakar Versus Santosh Kumar Paul & Ors. Mr. Siddhartha Lahiri Mr. Debraj Dutta …for the petitioner Ms. Subhangi Bhattacharya …for the opposite parties This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is at the instance of the defendant/appellant in Title Appeal No. 23 of 2022 and is directed against an order being No. 18 dated 5th January, 2026, passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Fast Track, 4th Court, Barrackpore, North 24 Parganas. By the order impugned, the prayer for stay of all further proceeding of the title execution case was allowed on condition that the petitioner shall pay occupational charges at Rs.10,000/- per month. Mr. Lahiri, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that non-payment of the occupational charges cannot take away the statutory right of appeal by the petitioners. He submits that the learned judge of the appellate court observed that in the event of non-compliance of the direction for deposit, the appellant/petitioner shall forfeit his right to proceed with the appeal. He further submits that the suit property is a room measuring only about 60 square feet and the rate of rent was Rs.150/- per month. He submits that the occupational charges fixed at Rs.10,000/- per month is an excessive one. Ms. Bhattacharya learned advocate appearing for the opposite parties submits that the suit property is a shop room 2 and the petitioner is exploiting the same for commercial purpose. She submits that the decreetal property is situated in the heart of Naihati and on the station road. She further submits that the suit property is within a commutable distance from the railway station, the main road and market. She submits that the petitioner claimed Rs.40,000/- on account of occupation charge and also produced the e-assessment slip and the mutation certificate in support of the claim for occupational charges. Heard the learned advocates for the respective parties and perused the materials placed. It is now well-settled that an order of stay of all further proceeding in an execution case arising out of a decree for eviction can be passed on condition that the judgment debtor shall pay occupational charges at the current market rate. The opposite party filed a written objection to the stay application claiming Rs.40,000/- per month as occupational charges. It further appears from the impugned order that the e-assessment slip and the mutation certificate have been produced by the opposite party. However, the petitioner did not file any rejoinder to the written objection controverting the rate of occupational charges claimed by the opposite party. Though the learned judge of the appeal court noted that e-assessment slip and the mutation certificate have been produced but no finding has been recorded by the learned judge of the appeal court as to the basis for arriving at the occupational charges. However, it is not in dispute that the 3 derceetal property is a shop room and the petitioner is exploiting the same for commercial purpose. No material has been produced by the petitioner either before the leaned judge of the appeal court or before this Court to substantiate the market rate of rent of a similar property in the same locality. Considering the fact that the measurement of the shop room is only 60 sq.ft., this Court is inclined to reduce the occupation charges to some extent. The occupational charges fixed by the learned judge of the appellate court is reduced to Rs.7,500/- per month with effect from the date of the judgment and decree passed by the learned trial judge. The petitioner shall pay the arrear occupation charges to the opposite parties by hand with effect from the date of judgment and decree passed by the learned trial judge till the month of August 2026 by two equal instalment and the first of such instlamnet shall be paid on or before 14th September, 2026 and the balance amount shall be paid on or before October 14, 2026. Current monthly occupational charge on or from the month of September 2026 shall be paid within the 7th day of each succeeding English calendar month. There shall be an unconditional order of stay of all further proceeding in the Title Execution Case no. 26 of 2022 pending before the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), 1st Court, Barrackpore, till 14th September, 2026. If the first instalment on account of the arrear occupation charge is paid within the time limit mentioned hereinbefore, the order of stay shall stand extended till 7th October, 2026. In the event the petitioner pays the current 4 occupation charges for the month of September 2026 on or before October 7 of 2026, the order of stay shall continue till the disposal of the Title Appeal No. 23 of 2022 pending before the learned Additional District Judge, Fast Track, 4th Court at Barrackpore, North 24 Parganas. It is, however, made clear that in the event of default of payment of any of the instalments on account of arrear occupation charges as well as any of the current monthly occupation charges, the order of stay shall stand automatically vacated without any further reference to this Court. With the above observations and direction, this civil revisional application stands disposed of. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance of all requisite formalities. (Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.)