JUDGMENT : BISWANATH SOMADDER, J. 1. By consent of the parties, the appeal is treated as on day’s list and taken up for consideration along with the application for stay. 2. On the prayer of the learned advocate representing the appellant/applicant, let the affidavit taking exception to the report in the form of an affidavit which was filed earlier on behalf of the South Dum Dum Municipality be taken on record. 3. The instant appeal arises out of a judgment and order dated 11th May, 2018, passed by a learned Single Judge in WP 24982 (W) of 2017 (Veena Devi Baid vs. Chairman, South Dum Dum Municipality & Ors.). By the impugned judgment and order, the learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition primarily on the ground that there is a civil suit pending between the parties, which relates to title of the car parking space. 4. The instant appeal has been preferred by the writ petitioner. 5. For convenience, the order dated 11th May, 2018, is reproduced here in below in its entirety:- ‘Affidavit-of-service filed in Court be kept with the record. Two writings are under challenge in the present writ petition. One is an order of August 31, 2012 and the other is grant of trade licence dated December 23, 2016. Learned advocate for the petitioner draws the attention of the Court to page 114 of the writ petition which is an inspection report. He submits that, the inspection report states that, a car parking space has been converted into commercial use. He questions the conversion. He submits that, car parking space cannot be converted. Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that, the illegality committed by the private respondents should be looked into by the writ Court. The private respondents and the municipality are represented. Learned advocate for the private respondents submits that, the conversion was done with the permission of the Vice-Chairman of the municipality as recorded in the inspection report at page 114 of the writ petition. Moreover, there is a title suit filed by the petitioner where the petitioner claims that, the private respondents had allegedly encroached upon a car parking space. Such suit is yet to be decided. Learned advocate for the municipality submits that, in view of the pending civil suit, no step has been taken. I have considered the rival contentions of the parties and materials made available on record. Such suit is yet to be decided. Learned advocate for the municipality submits that, in view of the pending civil suit, no step has been taken. I have considered the rival contentions of the parties and materials made available on record. As noted above, an order of 2012 is under challenge in the present writ petition of 2017. Be that as it may, the inspection report records that, the conversion took place consequent upon the permission being granted by the Vice-Chairman. There is a civil suit pending between the private parties. The civil suit related to the title of the car parking space. In such circumstances, it would be inappropriate for a writ Court to exercise discretion till such time, the rights of the parties are finally adjudicated upon in the civil suit. W.P. No.24982 (W) of 2017 is dismissed.’ 6. During the course of hearing of the instant appeal we had granted an opportunity to the South Dum Dum Municipality to file a report in the form of an affidavit. We also granted an opportunity to the appellant to file an exception to the said report in the form of an affidavit. 7. Today, at the time of hearing of the matter the learned advocate representing the private respondent no.7, hands over a copy of the plaint filed in Title Suit No.334 of 1999, which is pending before the learned 3rd Court of Civil Judge (Jr. Division) at Sealdah. 8. A bare perusal of the same clearly reveals that there exists a private civil dispute between the parties. As such, the correctness of the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge cannot be questioned in an Intra Court Mandamus Appeal, where only palpable infirmities or perversities necessitate interference by the Court of Appeal. 9. For reasons stated above, the appeal and the application for stay are liable to be dismissed and stand accordingly dismissed. Arindam Mukherjee, J. : I agree.