RAM SHYAM Vs. MARKET COMMITTEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition is directed against the order dated 24.11.2001 passed by the Additional District Judge, Kamal accepting the appeal of the defendant -respondent against the order dated 7.6.2000 passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division) Karnal. The Civil Judge has allowed the application of the plaintiff -petitioners filed under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for brevity 'the Code').

(2.) THE facts necessary for deciding the controversy in issue are that the plaintiff -petitioners filed a suit for mandatory/permanent injunction seeking a direction to the defendant -respondent to supply pure drinking water for human consumption and for animals at five public places in the New Grain Market and to make available sewerage system, drainage system and also to provide other facilities like street lights in the Grain Market/Additional Grain Market. The further prayer was to get Hadda Rori shifted from the back side of certain shops. Host of other reliefs have also been prayed for with an additional prayer that after the various facilities were provided, the defendant -respondent be directed to reschedule the payment of the six monthly instalments in respect of the shops and booths purchased by the plaintiff -petitioners. Relief of permanent injunction has also been prayed that defendant -respondent be restrained from recovering from the plaintiff -petitioners the first instalment due w.e.f. 1.1.2000 and subsequently five instalments alongwith interest @ 15 percent plus 4 percent penal interest p.a. and also restraining the defendant -respondent from canceling the allotment of the plaintiff -petitioners of their respective shops/booths.

(3.) I have heard Shri Puneet Bali, advocate for the plaintiff -petitioners and Shri Rajesh Bindal, Advocate for the respondent -caveator.