LILA DEVI Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Plaintiff Smt. Lila Devi has filed the present suit for recovery of Rs. 8,50,000/- as damages as under:

(2.) Briefly stated, the case of the Plaintiff as set out in the plaint is this. The Plaintiff is the owner of the land comprising of Khasra No. 589 of village Kaithlighat, Mauza Katoli, Tehsil Kandaghat of District Solan. She had constructed a pucca building in the year 1990 on this land at the cost of more than rupees one lakh. She was running a tea stall and "Dhaba" alongwith her two sons, Pradeep and Inder Dev and each one of them was earning about Rs. 5,000/- per month. No objection was raised by any one during the course of construction of the building by the Plaintiff in the above said land. One Shri M.D. Sharma, a retired Subedar, who has strained relations with the Plaintiff and her family and who is an influential person, made a complaint to the Chief Minister and Minister for Public Works that the Plaintiff had raised construction over the Government land belonging to Public Works Department. The Assistant Engineer on the basis of such complaint without ascertaining the correctness thereof, lodged a report against the Plaintiff before the Collector Kandaghat for her ejectment. In the proceedings initiated against the Plaintiff under the provisions of H.P. Public Premises and Land (Eviction and Rent Recovery) Act, 1971 (for short, the Act) Naib Tehsildar, Kandaghat, carried out measurements at the spot on 4.5.1995 and submitted his report to the Collector on 9.5.1995. It is averred that measurements at the spot were not carried out correctly. The Plaintiff was not explained or disclosed the details and result of such demarcation. Her land comprising of Khasra No. 589 was never measured nor any permanent points were fixed. Objections to the report were raised on behalf of the Plaintiff! Her request for fresh demarcation by the Tehsildar was not acceded to. The Collector on 7.8.1995 passed an order for the ejectment of the Plaintiff by demolition of her building. The copy of the order was not supplied to the Plaintiff till 31.8.1995. In pursuance of the wrong and illegal order dated 7.8.1995 the Defendants 3 to 4 acting in a hasty and illegal manner demolished the building of the Plaintiff wrongfully, thereby causing loss to the Plaintiff.

(3.) The Defendants No. 1 to 5, while resisting the suit, pleaded that a part of Khasra No. 589 measuring 10 biswas and presently demoted by Khasra No. 620/589, which was acquired by Defendant No. 1 for construction of a road is owned by Defendant No. 1. The Plaintiff encroached upon a part of this land in 1992 by raising a "Dhara" type of construction therein. This encroached area is now denoted by Khasra No. 620/589/ 1. Accordingly, proceedings for ejectment were initiated against her and an order of ejectment was legally and validly passed against her on 7.8.1995 after giving her due opportunities under the law. It is further pleaded that during the work of construction by the Plaintiff, she was served a notice dated 24.11.1992 asking her to stop the work till demarcation was carried out. However, the Plaintiff continued with the work. It was further pleaded that the Plaintiff was ejected from the encroached area in pursuance of the ejectment order and that no damage or loss was caused to or suffered by the Plaintiff.