CHIDAMBAR Vs. MAZBULAHMAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANTS in RSA No.1360/2007 are defendant Nos.2 to 4 in the original suit bearing O.S.No.389/2002, which was pending on the file of II Additional Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and JMFC -II, Dharwad. Similarly, appellants in RSA No.1364/2007 are defendant Nos.2 to 4 in the said suit. Plaintiff No.6 -Makabdulahmad is respondent No.1 in RSA No.1360/2007. Defendant No.1 -Smt.Geeta is respondent No.2 in this appeal. Defendant No.5 -Hubli Dharwad Municipal Corporation is respondent No.3 in the said appeal.

(2.) IN the connected RSA 1364/2007, respondent Nos.1 to 3 herein are plaintiff Nos.1 to 3 in the said suit. Respondent No.4 Mousalsab is plaintiff No.5 in the said suit. Respondent No.5 -Vasanti is plaintiff No.4 in the said suit. Respondent No.6 -Maqbulahmad is plaintiff No.6 in the said suit. Respondent No.7 -Geeta Shankar is defendant No.1 in the said suit. Respondent No.8 -HDMC is defendant No.5 in the said suit. Parties will be referred to as plaintiff Nos.1 to 6 and defendant Nos.1 to 5 as per their ranking given in the trial Court.

(3.) PLAINTIFFS chose to file a representative suit under Order 1 Rule 8 of CPC for the relief of declaration that plot No.35 carved out in Sy.No.64 of Lakamanahalli village coming within the purview of Hubli Dharwad Municipal Corporation is a site earmarked for garden in the layout formed in Sy.No.64 and for consequential relief of permanent injunction to restrain defendant Nos.1 to 4 from proceeding with the construction on plot No.35. According to the plaintiffs, while approving the layout, government has earmarked plot No.35 for developing the same as a garden and therefore, it is a civic amenity site. It is their case that, defendant Nos.1 to 4 cannot make any construction and that defendant No.5 - HDMC cannot give the license to put up any type of construction, whether residential or non -residential. According to them, plot No.35 is a park site bounded by road on all the four sides and that the City Improving Trust Board, Hubli -Dharwad has issued an endorsement dated 11.07.2002 to the plaintiffs stating that plot earmarked for park in the layout carved out in Sy.No.64 of Lakamanahalli cannot be used for any purpose other than developing a park. With these pleadings a representative suit came to be filed.