(1.) Heard.
(2.) Despite repeated calls in the pass over counsel for the respondents did not appear as such in absence of the counsel appeal is heard.
(3.) As per the case of the plaintiff, plaintiff has commissioned 100 mega watt power plant at Korba wherein hospital and residential colony were also developed. In order to safe guard such residential colony boundary wall was proposed to be constructed for which an application was preferred to the appellant/defendant No.1. After the construction commenced a notice was served to the plaintiff that without any permission construction has been started and it was stopped. Subsequently a settlement was arrived at and penalty was imposed and permission was accorded. Thereafter, permission was accorded to construct the boundary wall and according to the sanctioned map under supervision of the Municipal Corporation construction was re-started which was completed in the month of August, 1996. After completion of the construction on 12/09/1996 again notice was served by the Municipal Corporation to the plaintiff that they have flouted the permission of the construction of clause No.6, 7 & 8 and direction was given to demolish boundary wall within 24 hours of the service of notice. The plaintiff claimed that the board through its officer appeared before the defendant No.1 the Municipal Corporation and submitted that entire construction was made in supervision of the executive engineer and there was no breach of any condition was made of the conditions but because of another dispute the corporation turned blind.