RAJIV KAPOOR Vs. WELFARE ASSOCIATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present petition is directed against the order of the Additional District Judge, Faridabad, dated 14th March, 1995, whereby he had upset the order of the trial Court by -which the injunction sought for by the respondent had been refused.

(2.) THE facts have been taken from the order of the trial Court and the parties herein referred to in the manner shown in the memo of parties before that Court. Plaintiff No. 1 is said to be a Registered Welfare Society of Sector 7, Urban Estate, Faridabad and plaintiffs No. 2 to 4 are the residents of that area. The case of the plaintiffs is that Sector 7, Faridabad was declared as a residential area and according to the lay out plan of this Sector plots had been carved out by the Haryana Urban Development Authority and that they had purchased such plots and, thereafter, constructed their houses on them. They further alleged that the defendants under the influence of some well connected persons had decided to permit part of the green belt meant for being used as a park to be utilised for the setting up of a petrol pump. Apprehending that the petrol pump would be set up shortly in the area, the plaintiffs filed a suit for permanent injunction and prayed for the grant of an ad -interim injunction during the pendency of the suit.

(3.) THE trial Court after noticing the arguments of the parties vide order dated 7.3.1995 declined the prayer for injunction giving a positive finding that the petrol pump was being set up in the area identified as an "Open Space" in the development scheme of Sector 7, Faridabad and as such putting up of a petrol pump in such an area, could not be said Lo be unjustified. It was also held by the trial Court that the balance of convenience lay with the defendants as the competent authority that is defendants 1 to 3 had already allotted the plot in dispute on lease to the Indian Oil Corporation which had not been impleaded as a party in the suit and even Rajiv Kapoor who was a licensee of the Indian Oil Corporation to run the petrol pump had been impleaded as defendant No. 4 on his application. The Court accordingly gave a finding in favour of the beneficiary defendant No. 4. An appeal was taken by the aggrieved party to the Court of Additional District Judge, Faridabad, who reversed the finding of the trial Court on the ground that open spaces shown in the site plan on which reliance had been placed by both the parties were to be used only for sports activities, parks, green belt or for recreation purposes only and the opening of a petrol pump was, therefore, not envisaged thereon. The Appellate Court was also deeply influenced by the fact that after the order vacating the injunction had been passed on 7.3.1955. Defendant No. 4 Rajiv Kapoor had taken steps for installing the petrol pump immediately after Court hours and this unholy haste, the Judge noted, was not bonafide or justified. The Appellate Court, accordingly, granted an injunction in favour of the plaintiffs. Aggrieved thereby, respondent No. 4 has come to this Court.