LAWS(MPH)-2006-2-47

NAGAR PALIKA NIGAM Vs. GOPAL KRISHNA

Decided On February 10, 2006
NAGAR PALIKA NIGAM Appellant
V/S
GOPAL KRISHNA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is filed by the appellant-defendant challenging judgment and decree dated 15-10-1999 passed by 8th Additional District Judge, Gwalior in Civil Suit No. 35-A/91.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that the respondent-plaintiff has filed the present suit for declaration and permanent injunction against the present appellant-defendant alleging that he is owner of House No. 29/998/1, Hanuman Chouraha, Lashkar, Gwalior. The plaintiff had purchased the said house from his ex-owner Jugal Kishore vide registered sale- deed dated 29-6-1988. The house was purchased for residential purpose. According to the plaintiff, he had filed an application for mutating his name in place of Jugal Kishore on 7-3-1989 and his name was mutated in the municipal record. Thereafter he sought a permission from the defendant Corporation for construction of a building, which was granted on 29-4-1991 vide document Ex. P-l. It is alleged by the plaintiff, he commenced the construction work after demolishing the said construction. After commencement the work, the permission was cancelled by the Commissioner of the Corporation vide letter dated 30-7-1991 (Ex. D-l ). According to the plaintiff, the said order of cancellation is illegal and void. He, therefore, prayed that the said order be declared void and respondent be restrained from interfering in his construction work. It is alleged that the said notice was served after commencement of the work. He was not afforded any opportunity of hearing before cancelling his permission in his favour. It is also alleged that no reasons are assigned in the order of cancellation and thus said order is illegal and liable to be declared void.

(3.) THE defendant filed its written statement denying the allegations made in the plaint. It is denied that the cancellation order was passed after commencement of the construction work. The defendant has also alleged that the construction work was cancelled, as the sanction was granted contrary to the master-plan.