NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL Vs. TARA CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a regular second appeal filed by the appellant/NDMC under Section 100 CPC against the judgment dated 18.1.2012 passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge in R.C.A. No.11/2005.

(2.) I have heard the learned counsel for the appellant. It has been stated that in terms of the orders passed by the trial court on 1.11.2004 and affirmed vide impugned order, the appellant/NDMC was directed not to dispossess the respondents from the parking lot allotted to them except after an alternative accommodation is provided to them in terms of the compromise dated 16.3.1962. The learned counsel has contended that although four sites have already been identified but they are yet to be offered to the respondents. It has also been stated that although the appellant will be offering an alternative site to the respondents shortly, however, a grievance is raised in the instant appeal with regard to the fact that though the respondents were allotted only a cycle stand but the impugned order as well as the order of the trial court have referred to the cycle stand as cycle -cum -scooter stand which is factually incorrect. Accordingly, a prayer has been made for entertaining the present appeal.

(3.) ON the pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed : -