GIAN CHAND Vs. PREM PARKASH KAPOOR AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These three identical appeals, at the hands of the plaintiff, are directed against the common judgment and decree, whereby three first appeals filed by the defendants were allowed by the learned District Judge, setting aside the judgment and decree of the learned trial court in a suit for declaration as well as permanent injunction.

(2.) Brief facts of the case, as noticed by the learned first appellate court in para 2 to 4 of the impugned judgment, are that Gian Chand filed suit against the respondents for declaration to the effect that he was owner in possession of land falling in khasra No.257 measuring 14 marlas situated in Mauza Jandil Abadi Kailash Nagar, Model Town, Ambala City as shown with red colour and letters ABCDEFG in the site plan attached with plaint. He also requested for perpetual injunction for restraining defendants from interfering in his peaceful possession and causing obstruction in construction being raised by him over this land. It was alleged that he purchased this land from Gulzar Sing son of Chitru Ram and Bhupinder Singh son of Gurbux Singh vide sale deed dated 04.2.1998. Possession of this land was also handed over to him at that time. Mutation was also sanctioned on 15.05.2005. When he started raising construction over this plot, defendant Nos.2 to 4 came there and asked him to stop construction because they were police officials and their children play cricket at that place and use the same as park. Defendant No.2 claimed himself to be owner of this plot. They also called one person, who claimed himself to be official of Municipal Committee ('MC' for short), Ambala City and he told that plot in question was reserved for park. He did not tell his name, but told that plaintiff did not have any right to raise construction. As per his instigation, defendants demolished wall constructed by him and also damaged barbed wire. He suffered loss to the tune of Rs. 50,000/-. As being owner, he was having every right to raise construction over this property and defendants could not cause any type of hindrance. He requested the defendants to admit his claim but to no avail. Hence, this suit.

(3.) Defendants No.1 filed separate written statement and defendant Nos.2 to 4 filed joint written statement controverting averments of the plaint. It was alleged by defendant No.1 that as per Town Planning Scheme (in short 'The Scheme'), plot in question was reserved for open space and plaintiff had concealed this fact from the Court. He was not having any locus-standi to file the suit and the same was not maintainable for want of notice under Section 52 of Haryana Municipal Act, 1973 (in short' Act). It was also bad for misjoinder and non-joinder of necessary parties. No. cause of action accrued to him to file this suit. Neither plaintiff purchased the land in dispute from GuIzar Singh son of Chitru Ram nor possession thereof was handed over to him. It was further averred that alleged sale deeds were bogus transaction without affecting its right. Plaintiff had no right to raise construction over the property in dispute because it was vested in MC Ambala City. None of its official ever threatened plaintiff of any consequences. He did not suffer loss to the tune of Rs. 50, 000/- as alleged by him. As plaintiff was not owner of property in dispute, he could not raise construction thereupon. Other averments were also denied. It was alleged that suit be dismissed with special costs.