NAGAR PALIKA PARISHAD Vs. BABULAL & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 26.10.99 passed by Additional District Judge, Sheopurkalan in Civil Appeal No. 4-A/99 whereby the judgment and decree passed in Civil Suit No. 227-A/ 88 by 3rd Civil Judge Class - II Sheopurkalan has been confirmed, the present appeal has been filed, which has been admitted by this Court on 7.2.2003 on the following substantial question of law:

(2.) The short facts of the case are that Narayanlal predecessor-in-title of the respondent filed suit for specific performance on oral contract on 15.3.1978 alleging that he was in occupation of the plot since last 25 years and was carrying his business. On 2.8.75 the then President and Vice President and Chief Municipal Officer asked to him that they want to construct Pakka Shop, therefore, he should remove his shop. It was alleged in the suit that there was assurance that after construction, shop will be given to him. It was alleged that upon assurance shop was removed. Further case of the appellant deceased Narayanlal was that on 25.8.75 vide resolution No. 78 respondent appellant resolved that the land reserved for shop shall be constructed on Nalla near the hospital and Rs. 2000/- (Rs. Two Thousand) were demanded as advance. It was also alleged that it was decided that the shop keeper who were in occupation and were removed will be entitled for shop. It was alleged that on 16.10.76 a sum of Rs. 2000/- was deposited by deceased Narayanlal. Shops were constructed but instead of allotting shop to the deceased Narayanlal near hospital the shop was allotted to him behind Library. It was alleged that deceased Narayanlal refused to take shop as it was not on main road. It was prayed that a decree for specific performance be passed to the effect that shop No. 25 or 26 below the hospital be allotted to him or any big shop be allotted.

(3.) The suit was contested by the defendants appellants. It was denied that any assurance was given by the defendants appellants. It was not disputed that an amount of Rs. 2000/- (Rs. Two Thousand) only was deposited. However, it was alleged that in the application itself deceased Narayanlal has mentioned that he is ready to take any shop whichever is allotted to him. It was prayed that suit be dismissed.