MUNICIPAL COUNCIL DHAR Vs. ABID HUSSAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both the Second Appeals have been filed against the judgment and decree dated 14.02.2019 passed by Second Civil Judge, Class-I, Dhar District Dhar whereby the suit has been decreed in favour of the plaintiffs and affirmed by judgment dated 27.06.2019 passed by 3rd ADJ, Dhar whereby the RCA No.16/13 filed by defendant no.3 and RCA No.17/19 filed by defendant Nos.1 and 2 have been dismissed.

(2.) Now, defendant nos.1 and 2 have filed the Second appeal No.2220/2019 and defendant no.3 filed the Second Appeal No.2002/2019 before this Court. Since, both the appeals are arising out of the common judgment and decree, hence, they are being decided co-jointly.Facts of the case in short are as under:

(3.) Respondent Nos.1 and 2 (hereinafter referred to as the plaintiffs) have filed the suit for declaration and permanent injunction against defendant nos.1 and 2. According to the plaintiffs, they are resident of Bohra Bakhal, Dhar. They purchase shamble property No.16 (old No.18), ward No.28, Dutt Gali, Dhar area 4338 sqft (403.90 Sqmtr.) vide registered sale deed dated 27.01.2009. Since, there was discrepancy in the width and length of the property, therefore, amended sale deed dated 15.07.2014 was also executed. The plaintiffs have obtained the NOC from the Nazul Office which was issued vide certificate dated 23.06.2015, thereafter, defendant no.1 has granted building permission on 23.07.2015. After obtaining the building permission and NOC, the plaintiffs have started construction within the boundaries of the property. Defendant No.1 issued the notice dated 26.06.2016 alleging that the construction is being raised in violation of sanctioned permission and provisions of Municipal Council Act. The plaintiffs filed civil suit seeking the relief of permanent injunction and declaration that the notice dated 26.06.2016 be declared void. The plaintiffs filed an application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of the CPC and vide order dated 02.09.2016, the application has been allowed and the parties were directed to maintain the status quo. Later on, vide notice dated 26.10.2016 (Ex.D/3), defendant nos.1 and 2 have canceled the building permission and directed for demolition of the construction within 24 hours. By way of amendment, the plaintiffs have also sought the relief that the order dated 26.10.2016 is void and not binding on them.