RAM LAL ETC Vs. UDMI RAM ETC

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this case, the petitioners-plaintiffs filed a suit for declaration to the effect that land marked LMJ, shown in the map measuring 70 square yards was a part of a thoroughfare and the said land sold by defendant No. 3 (Municipal Council, Narnaul) in favour of defendant No. 1 (Udmi Ram Aggarwal) vide sale deed dated 14. 7. 1990, was without jurisdiction, null and void and against public policy and public interest. Along with the plaint, the plaintiffs filed an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 and Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure for interim injunction. The said application was dismissed by the learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Narnaul, vide order dated 23. 5. 1997. Against the said order dated 23. 5. 1997, the petitioners-plaintiff filed an appeal which was dismissed by the learned Additional District Judge, Narnaul, vide order dated 12. 11. 1997. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order the present petition has been filed by the plaintiffs.

(2.) NOTICE of Motion was issued to the respondents on 26. 11. 1997 and meanwhile the parties were directed to maintain status quo. On 23. 1. 1998, an affidavit dated 13. 12. 1997 of Smt. Sharda Aggarwal, wife of Om Parkash Aggarwal on behalf of respondent No. 2 was filed in the Court and the same was taken on record. In this affidavit, it has been stated that construction over the suit property was almost complete. The roof slab had already been laid and it was only flooring, plastering and tile terracing of the roof which remains to be done.

(3.) LEARNED counsel further submitted that the Municipal Council in connivance with defendants Nos. 1 and 2 had passed resolution No. 70, by which the site plan submitted by the private defendants for construction of shops on the suit land was approved but the said resolution was suspended by the Deputy Commissioner, Mohindergarh, vide order dated 9. 11. 1995 under Section 246 of the Haryana Municipal Act, 1973, (hereinafter referred to as the Act ). He further submitted that even the order dated 9. 11. 1995 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Mohindergarh, had been approved by the Commissioner, in terms of Section 249 of the Act. He, therefore, contended that the Courts below were not correct in dismissing the application filed by the petitioners-plaintiffs for interim injunction.