TRICHIRAPPALLI CITY MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP BY ITS EXECUTIVE AUTHORITY COMMISSIONER Vs. SENTHILKUMARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Second Appeal is focussed by the original defendant animadverting upon the judgment and decree dated 15.11.2002, passed in A.S.No.246 of 2001 by the learned Principal District Judge, Tiruchirappalli, in reversing the judgment and decree dated 17.07.2001, passed in O.S.No.465 of 1998 by the learned Subordinate Judge, Tiruchirappalli.

(2.) The parties, for the sake of convenience, are referred to hereunder according to their litigative status and ranking before the trial Court.

(3.) A summation and summarisation of the relevant facts absolutely necessary and germane for the disposal of this second appeal would run thus: The respondent/plaintiff filed the suit seeking the reliefs of permanent injunction and recovery of a sum of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees Forty Thousand only) towards damages on the ground that earlier the Government wanted to acquire a part of the plaintiff's property measuring 5200 square feet in S.No.4045/1, Puthur Village out of the total extent of 66 cents belonging to the plaintiff. Subsequently, as per the order of the Madras High Court in W.P.No.17 of 1955 dated 26.04.1956, the proceedings for acquisition were quashed. However, without taking into consideration the fact that the proposal for laying road through the land of the plaintiff was quashed, the defendant Municipality without even adhering to the procedure contemplated in law high-handedly demolished the suit structure. In fact one Dhanalakshmi and others tried to encroach into the suit property, whereupon, the suit O.S.No.209 of 1996 was filed on the file of the Sub Court, Tiruchirappalli by the plaintiff and the said Dhanalakshmi and others also filed 4 suits in O.S.Nos.353, 356, 359 and 404 of 1997 on the file of the said Court. The trial Court by a common judgment decreed the suit of the plaintiff and dismissed the suits filed by Dhanalakshmi and others and the appeals filed against the common judgment and decrees were also dismissed by the Hon'ble High Court in A.S.Nos.233 of 234 of 2000 dated 10.07.2007. While so, the defendant without any manner of right demolished the structure put up by the plaintiff in the suit property and hence, the suit.