BIR SINGH Vs. JAGAN NATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Jagan Nath, plaintiff-respondent, filed a suit in Gram Panchayat, Kookanet for the recovery of Rs. 200/- as damages on the basis that there was an agreement between the present petitioners and himself before the respectables of the village in which Bir Singh petitioner had agreed to open the Kuhl and not to obstruct Jagan Nath, respondent to irrigate his land measuring 7 kanals 13 marlas, but the petitioners had forcibly closed the Kuhl without any justifiable causes. The Gram Panchayat allowed his application and awarded him the compensation of Rs. 200/- vide its order dated 26th March, 1973. Dissatisfied by the order of the Gram Panchayat, Bir Singh and others petitioners, filed a revision before the Senior Sub-Judge, Hoshiarpur, who after hearing the parties dismissed the revision petition and confirmed the order of the Gram Panchayat. It is against these orders of the Gram Panchayat and the Senior Sub Judge. Hoshiarpur that the present petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India by the present petitioners.

(2.) Mr. Malook Singh, learned counsel for the present petitioners, contended that the Panchayat had no jurisdiction to award the compensation of Rs. 200/- to the respondent. His argument is that the compensation has been awarded under section 52(1)(c) of the Punjab Gram Panchayat Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and that according to the respondent's own showing no crop had yet been sown and there was no damage to any moveable property and therefore no compensation could be awarded under section 52(1)(c) of the Act. Section 52 is reproduced below :-

(3.) No other point is urged.