NIRMAL SINGH Vs. LUDHIANA IMPROVEMENT TRUST

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Pritam Singh instituted suit for permanent injunction against Ludhiana Improvement Trust, Ludhiana (hereinafter referred to be as Trust) restraining the latter from dispossessing him from land measuring 4 Bighas, 16 Biswas, 9 Biswansis as detailed in the heading of the plaint situated in the revenue estate of village Noor Bhaini, Tehsil and District Ludhiana per jamabandi for the year 1979-80. It is alleged in the plaint that he is owner in possession of the land measuring 4 Bighas, 16 Biswas, 9 Biswansis. Trust framed a scheme known as Model Town Extension Scheme No. 1, which was sanctioned by the Government vide Notification No. 2070-II-C-III-64/16894, dated 11-5-1964 for an area measuring 165 acres. This scheme comprised of the land of the revenue estates of villages Karabara, Piru Banda, Noor Bhaini and Bulara. Land measuring 40 Bighas, 4 Biswas, 11 Biswansis of the revenue estate of village Noor Bhaini was included in the Scheme. Out of that land measuring 40 B 4 B 11 B, land measuring 17 bighas, 6 biswas, 1 biswansi belonged to the Central Government. Only land measuring 0 bigha, 2 biswas, 6 biswansis belonged to the Municipal Committee. Trust was advised by the Land Acquisition Collector to acquire land belonging to the Central Government through negotiations with Regional Settlement Commissioner, Jalandhar and to take over the land of the Municipal Committee after issuing notice under S.46 of the Punjab Town Improvement Act. Trust did not acquire that land. Central Government transferred the land to different persons. Plaintiff is in possession of the suit land. He was allotted two plots Nos. 173 and 174 measuring 548-52 and 570 square yards vide allotment order dated 15-5-1971 in the scheme. Trust did not hand over possession of these plots to him. It was alleged in the plaint that scheme in Noor Bhaini area could not be legally executed by the Trust until the complete area comprised in the sanctioned scheme was acquired by the Trust. Land in suit was in possession of the plaintiff where he has installed tubewell. He has dwelling house in the land in suit. Plaintiff paid full price for the said plots No. 173 and 174. Defendant failed to hand over possession of the plots without acquisition of land measuring 17 bighas, 6 biswas, 1 biswansi which is now owned and possessed by different individuals and without being able to develop the area and without being able to hand over possession of plots No. 173 and 174 to the plaintiff, the officials of the Trust threatened to dispossess the plaintiff from the land in suit.

(2.) Defendant-Trust contested the suit of the plaintiff urging that land in suit falls in the scheme and the award was passed. Trust took possession of the land after compensation was paid. Trust is owner in possession of the land in suit. It was for the defendant-Trust to see how the scheme was to be executed. Letter dated 15-7-1971 regarding allotment of plots was issued but the plaintiff failed to pay the full price and had not completed other formalities. As defendant-Trust is owner of the land in suit, the suit as such is not maintainable. It was urged that suit was bad for non-compliance of S.98 of the Punjab Town Improvement Act.

(3.) On the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed by the trial Court.