HUSENBI SADRODDIN SHAIAKH Vs. CANTONMENT BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this appeal under Section 100 C. P. C. the appellant-plaintiff calls in question the judgment and decree of the 1st Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) at Belgaum in RA. No. 203/1996 affirming the judgment and decree dated 4. 11. 1996 passed by the Prl. Munsiff at Belgaum in o. S. No. 56/1994 dismissing the suit filed by the plaintiff.

(2.) THE plaintiff filed the suit praying for permanent injunction against the defendant ? Board restraining the Board from acting upon the notice issued by it under Section 256 of Cantonments Act, 1924 (?the Act? for short) on the ground that the Board was not entitled to initiate action under Section 256 of the Act as the appellant-plaintiff had not violated any of the provisions of the Act. The defendant-Board opposed the claim of the plaintiff on the ground that the action taken by the Board was quite in accordance with law. The learned munsiff framed the following issues as arising for its consideration:

(3.) BEING aggrieved by the dismissal of the suit, the plaintiff went in appeal before the Court-below on the ground that the judgment and decree of the Trial Court was contrary to law and facts on record and, therefore, unsustainable in law. The court-below framed the following issues as arising for its determination.