NIYAZ AALAM Vs. NAGAR PALIKA PARISHAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal by plaintiff is directed against the judgment and decree dated 17/7/2012 in Civil Appeal No. 7 -A/2012 confirming the judgment and decree dated 1/4/2011 in Civil Suit No. 56 -A/2010. Plaintiff's suit for permanent injunction has been dismissed.

(2.) PLAINTIFF filed a suit inter alia contending that in a row eight shops have been constructed by Nagar Palika Parishad, Cantt, Guna at Guna -Ashoknagar road. These shops, therefore, are of the ownership of the Municipal Council. Shop No. 8 was allotted to Jagdish Harijan S/o. Nannulal Harijan. A rent deed was also executed by defendant/municipal council in his name. Plaintiff claimed to have taken on rent the aforesaid shop from Jagdish by depositing security amount on 27/6/1996 on monthly rent of Rs. 100/ -. He is carrying on the business of tyre repairs under the name and style of Niyaz Tyre Works. On 5/7/1996 he was served with a notice issued by the Municipal Council alleging that plaintiff has unauthorizedly and illegally taken possession of four shops and was required to vacate the same. Having apprehended forcible dispossession, plaintiff filed the instant suit for permanent injunction.

(3.) ON aforesaid pleadings, trial court framed issues and allowed the parties to lead evidence. Upon critical evaluation of entire evidence on record with due advertence to the pleadings of the parties, trial court dismissed the suit. On appeal, the first appellate court has re -appreciated the entire evidence on record. Admittedly, the suit shop was never allotted by Municipal Council to the plaintiff. As such, there is no landlord -tenant relationship between the plaintiff and defendant. Therefore, any agreement executed between the plaintiff and Jagdish for want of authority is illegal, hence, continuance of plaintiff over the suit shops is unauthorized. With the aforesaid findings, first appellate court confirmed the findings of the trial court and dismissed the appeal.