TULSI RAM Vs. SDO WATER SERVICES SUB DIVISION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been preferred by the plaintiffs whose suit for permanent injunction has been dismissed by both the courts. Briefly stated, the appellants' case is that they have constructed their houses in the subject land and are living therein from the last more than 50 years. In order to prove possession, it s averred that they have been granted electricity connections. According to the appellants, when a fire broke out in their huts in 1994, the compensation was also paid to them by the State Government.

(2.) Upon notice, the respondents contested the suit on the plea that the appellants are in unauthorized possession of the suit land which is a government property. It was stated that in order to evict the appellants in due course of law, petitions under Sections 4 and 5 of the Public Premises Act were filed against the appellants and the same were allowed by the Collector on 30.10.2001. The appellants preferred appeals under the aforesaid Act which were also dismissed by the appellate authority on 28.2.2002. It was, thus, pleaded that the action to dispossess the appellants is being taken in a lawful manner.

(3.) Relying upon copy of the jamabandi for the year 1994-95 (Ex.D1), site plan (Ex.D2) and the orders passed by the Authority as well as the Appellate Authority respectively, under the Public Premises Act, (Ex.D3 and D4), the trial court dismissed the suit after holding that as the appellants have encroached upon the government land, the authorities are entitled to dispossess them in due course of law. The trial court also observed that the appellants-plaintiffs are guilty of concealing material facts, inasmuch as the fact that proceedings initiated under the Public Premises Act stood concluded against them, was not disclosed in the suit.