RAJENDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this common order, I am disposing of two appeals i.e. RSA No. 3031 of 2008 and RSA No. 3030 of 2008, both preferred by the plaintiffs. Both these appeals have arisen out of a single suit. Reason for filing two appeals is that there were two first appeals i.e. one by defendant No. 1 and other by defendants No. 2 and 3, which were disposed of by the lower appellate court by a common judgment. Aggrieved thereby, plaintiffs have filed instant two second appeals.

(2.) Facts in this case are not very much in dispute. Plaintiffs alleged that they have constructed their houses in the fields and there are also other houses and the cluster of houses is known as Ramgopal Ki Dhani of village Bahu. According to defendant No. 1, plaintiffs are still residing in village abadi and not in Dhani. The plaintiffs' grievance is that defendant No. 1 is installing a brick kiln near the Dhani. The said brick kiln would cause nuisance to the plaintiffs as per their version. Accordingly, the plaintiffs sought permanent injunction restraining defendant No. 1 Kartar Singh from installing any brick kiln in land of killa No. 6/2 and 7 and restraining defendants No. 2 and 3 i.e. State of Haryana and District Food and Supply Collector from granting any licnece to defendant No. 1 for running the said brick kiln.

(3.) Defendants pleaded that licence had already been issued in favour of defendant No. 1. According to version of defendant No. 1 licence for running the brick kiln was issued in his favour on 9.1.2006. However, according to defendants No. 2 and 3, exemption from certain clauses of the Haryana Control of Bricks Supplies Order, 1972 (in short, the Order) was granted to defendant No. 1 subject to certain conditions vide letter dated 9.1.2006 issued by Principal Secretary to the Government and thereupon licence dated 6.2.2006 was issued by District Magistrate, Jhajjar. Defendant No. 1 also alleged that he has already installed his brick kiln in the land in question.