USHA SIKAND Vs. MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this order, I am disposing of two revision petitions bearing No. C. R. 3905 of 1996 and 3906 of 1996 as the point of fact and law raised in these two petitions are similar.

(2.) IN this case the Executive Officer, Municipal Committee, Kapurthala, issued notice No. 52/me, dated 19. 4. 1990 to the owner of building known as IVEN HOE. Teh. Mal, Kapurthala, to show cause as to why the walls illegally constructed and the encroachment made in the Brigadier House, Kapurthala, be not removed. Pritipal Singh, who is the husband of the petitioner filed a suit No. 161 of 28. 4. 1990 against Municipal Committee, Kapurthala for permanent injunction against the aforesaid notice dated 19. 4. 1990. In the plaint, it was stated by said Priti Pal Singh that the said building was owned and possessed by Maharaj Kanwar Ajit Singh who had allowed him to occupy the house and gel it renovated and construct the damaged portion of the northern wall. In this suit, the issues were framed on 13. 11. 1990. Case was fixed for plaintiffs evidence on 16. 10. 1991, but on that date neither any person appeared on behalf of the plaintiff nor any of his witnesses were in attendance. Accordingly, the evidence of the plaintiff was closed under Order 17 Rule 3 C. P. C. and the suit was dismissed with costs on that date. The aforesaid judgment dated 16. 10. 1991 was not challenged by Priti Pal Singh.

(3.) ON 21. 1. 1995 the petitioner-plaintiff filed another suit against the Municipal Committee for permanent injunction restraining the committee from interfering with the possession of the plaintiff by dismantling any portion of eastern and western walls of the suit property. Alongwith this plaint also the petitioner-plaintiff filed an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 C. P. C. for interim injunction which was allowed by the learned Sub Judge, Kapurlhala vide Order dated 10. 4. 1995 and the defendant committee was restrained from demolishing the boundary wall. Against the said Order dated 10. 4. 1995 the Municipal Committee filed an appeal before the learned Additional District Judge, Kapurthala who by his Order dated 16. 9. 1996 has allowed the appeal filed by the Committee. The present petition have been filed against the Orders dated 16. 9. 1996 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Kapurthala.