SMT. POONAM Vs. THE DISTRICT TOWN PLANNER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Plaintiff-Petitioner has filed a suit for permanent injunction for restraining the Defendant from interfering into the peaceful possession of the Plaintiff. It is the case of the Petitioner that she has purchased part of the land measuring 21 bighas and 15 biswas vide a registered sale deed dated 11.6.2010 and that the Plaintiff is in possession of the suit land since the date of purchase and has constructed the temple on the said land and that they are worshiping in the said temple. The Plaintiff has also built a path for egress and ingress to the land in dispute for her own use. It is further pleaded that previously the owner namely, M/s Mission Flora India Limited, Karnal made the land in dispute uneven, but the Plaintiff levelled land and has raised construction in some portion of the land and that the Defendant has no right title or interest in the suit but the Defendant is threatening to demolish the construction raised by the Petitioner. Such suit was accompanied with an application to grant ad interim injunction as well.

(2.) On behalf of the Defendant, it was asserted that the temple was raised a day before filing of the suit and that the passage made in the area is for development of unauthorized colony and not for the egress and ingress of the land for the own use of the Plaintiff. It was pointed out that the process of laying roads is in violation of Section 7(ii) of the Haryana Development and Regulation of Urban Areas Act, 1975 (for short ' the 1975 Act') and the construction of the temple as well as the roads is also in violation of the Section 6 and 7 (i) of Punjab Schedule Roads and Unregulated Development Act, 1963 (for short 'the 1963 Act').

(3.) Though, learned trial Court granted ad interim injunction in favour of the Petitioner but the learned first Appellate Court accepted the appeal and set aside the order of the learned trial Court on 11.10.2010. It was found that as per notification dated 10.9.1971, the Town and Country Planning Department, Haryana has notified the controlled area for the District Karnal. The area as mentioned in the Schedule of the notification shows that the land in dispute situated around Municipal Town of Karnal is part of controlled area, therefore, the Petitioner is not entitled to ad interim injunction as the construction activities undertaken by the Plaintiff are in contravention of the conditions laid down in such notification.