NILESHKUMAR JAYANTILAL SHAH Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Today, Civil Application is listed along with the main petition. However, learned Advocate for the applicant insists that considering the nature of prayers made in the Civil Application, the Civil Application be taken up for hearing and disposal. Accordingly, Civil Application is taken up for hearing.

(2.) This Civil Application is filed with prayers as under:-?

(3.) As against this, learned Senior Advocate for the respondent ?Nagarpalika submitted that location of the property in question was such that it was creating hindrance to traffic and also its location was such that construction activity of a shopping centre of the rspondent ?Nagarpalika, for which excavation work had started and thereby causing damage or likely damage to very old structure of 'Kabutarkhana', below which the property in question is located. Continuing of that structure on the middle of the road was creating not only public nuisance but also danger to the public life, as a result of which the respondent ?Nagarpalika was required to act swiftly. It is submitted that at the outset, there was no intention to defy th orders of the Court as well as committing breach of the decree;. It is submitted that despite attempts were made by the respondent ?Nagarpalika to settle the issue in accordance with the decree, te applicant was completely non ? cooperative. The Nagarpalika had entered into the talks with the original owner, i.e. Jain Mahajan Sangh and was agreeable to move to alternative place provided temporarily and permanent place in newly constructed shopping centre of the respondent ?Nagarpalika. In the affidavit in reply to the Civil Application, the deponent ? President of the Nagarpalika has stated as under:-