HARYANA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Vs. ESCON BUILDERS LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) C.M. No. 10780-C of 2013

(2.) Briefly stated, it is the case of the plaintiff-respondent that he is the owner in possession of the SCO No. 47, Sector-11, Panchkula. There was some temporary construction on the rear side of the show-room which was raised in the year 2002, for which no objection was raised by HUDA. However, a show-cause notice dated 18.7.2005 (Ex. P.W. 1/5) was issued. According to the plaintiff-respondent, the aforesaid construction was not in violation of any building plan and the same could have been compounded but the Estate Officer, HUDA straightway initiated the proceedings of resumption of show-room. It was, further stated that the only recourse to the authorities at the most was to initiate action under Section 55 of the Act.

(3.) The suit was contested by the appellants alleging in the written statement that the plaintiff-respondent had constructed a mini-market in the rear portion of the show-room which was in violation of the sanctioned building plan as well as the zoning plan and therefore notice under Section 17(3) of the HUDA Act was issued. It was further submitted that violation was non-compoundable and rightly deserved initiation of proceedings for resumption under the Act. The appellants have further raised objection as to the jurisdiction of the Civil Court submitting that under Section 50 of the HUDA Act, 1977 jurisdiction of the Civil Court is barred.