PRASHANT NARULA Vs. MCD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against order dated 06.01.2010 of Additional Senior Civil Judge, Rohini District Courts, Delhi whereby he allowed an application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC of the respondent.

(2.) The petitioners had filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction against the respondent MCD on the averments that plaintiff No. 2 (petitioner No. 2 herein) is the owner of plot in Khasra No. 262, 258 & 217/4 in village Bharola, Delhi, but, the MCD was allowing some persons to use the same for marriage purposes. Declaration was sought to the effect that the MCD had no right or interest in this plot and so should be restrained from raising any construction thereon. The MCD had filed written statement stating to be running an Ayurvedic dispensary on the aforesaid plot for the welfare of the people.

(3.) The learned Trial Court allowed the application subject to certain costs. The trial judge precisely reasoned as under: