MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE Vs. BHAGWAN DAS MITTAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition is filed against the order of the Additional District Judge, Sangrur, dated 18. 11. 1997 confirming the order of the Additional Civil Judge, (Senior Division), Dhuri dated 30. 8. 1996. The respondents-plaintiffs belong to a noble profession of Advocates. They occupied the land belonging to the Municipal Committee and constructed chambers unauthorisedly within the Court complex. When the Municipal Committee tried to demolish the chambers, the plaintiffs filed the suit for injunction. The trial Court granted injunction restraining the Municipal Committee from demolishing the chambers which has been confirmed by the Additional District Judge, Sangrur, in the impugned order. Hence, this revision.

(2.) ADMITTEDLY , the land on which the chambers have been constructed does not belong to the respondents but belongs to the petitioner-Municipal Committee. There can be no injunction against the rightful owner. The fact that the dismissal of the injunction application makes the suit infructuous, is no ground for granting injunction when the respondents admittedly constructed the chambers unauthorisedly. That there were no chambers available for the Advocates in the Court complex is also no ground for granting injunction. Though the respondents-plaintiffs stated that no notices have been issued to them for demolition of the chambers, the Municipal Committee placed on record the notices issued to the plaintiffs under Sections 195a, 172 and also under Section 220 of the Punjab Municipal Act. Thus, it is clear that the respondents who are expected to maintain the rule of law, have not come up with clean hands. They made a wrong and false averments in the plaint only in order to secure the order of injunction.

(3.) ACCORDINGLY , I allow the revision petition and set aside the order of the Courts below and vacate the injunction granted in favour of the respondents.