1 WBCHCA0457602026 Item No.14 Ct. No.1 KS IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE M.A.T. 1524 of 2026 + I.A. No. CAN 1 of 2026 Umme Hani & Anr. Versus The State of West Bengal & Ors. Appearance: Mr. Goutam Banerjee Mr. Samrat Das Ms. Ruma Singh …..Advocates for Appellants Mr. D. N. Ray, Ld. G.P. Mr. Atanu Basu Ms. Ankana Sarkar …..Advocates for State Mr. Rishav Ray Mr. Debasish Sinha Ms. Sharmistha Dhar Mr. Additiya Mukherjee Mr. S. Majumder …..Advocates for Respondent No.5 CORAM: RAVINDRA VITHALRAO GHUGE, CHIEF JUSTICE & OM NARAYAN RAI, J. Date: 07.10.2026 2 Order (Per Court) 1. We have heard the learned counsel for the Appellants for quite sometime. 2. It is contended by the Appellants, who are inter se husband and wife, that unknown persons, barged into their residence and looted an amount of Rs.10.73 lakhs in cash and gold worth Rs.17 lakhs 42 thousand. The house is now under lock and key and the keys are with the private Respondent Nos.5 and 6. A civil dispute is pending before the Civil Court between the Appellants and Respondent Nos.5 and 6. Injunction has been declined by the Trial Court. 3. Learned advocate, therefore, prays that this Court should directed the concerned police station to open the residential premises, search out the belongings of the Appellants and deliver to them all the goods that belong to the Appellants, which are inside the house. 4. In the pleadings before us, it is stated that the Appellants are licensees, who are paying license fees to the landlord. The suit preferred by the Appellants is for seeking injunction against the licensee and a declaration of bona fide licensee. 3 5. We have perused the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge, dated 01.09.2026. The Learned Single Judge has relied upon the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sujal Vishwas Attavar & Anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors., 2026 SCC OnLine SC 798. We do not find that the impugned order could be branded as being perverse or erroneous. 6. In view of the above, this Appeal is dismissed. 7. Accordingly, the Civil Application No. I.A. No.1 of 2026 would not survive and stands rejected. (OM NARAYAN RAI, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE) Chief Justice