MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE, DALHOUSIE Vs. MADAN LAL AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal and the Cross Objections are being disposed of by this judgment, as the same have arisen out of one judgment and decree passed by the Courts below.

(2.) Shri Madan Lal Mahajan, respondent No.1, filed a suit before the Senior Sub Judge, Chamba, Camp at Dalhousie and asked for the following reliefs :

(3.) The case of the plaintiff, as pleaded in the suit, has been that he was owner of the building known as Shiv Ram Building, two storeyed (East), situated near Subhash Chowk, Dalhousie and this building was constructed by the father of the plaintiff in the year 1934. The first storey of the building is alleged to be at the level of the municipal road known as Potreyn Mall, Dalhousie which was used as photographic studio at first instance and later on, with the approval of the Municipal Committee, Dalhousie for other commercial purposes. Plaintiff's further case has been that in the year 1983, he moved an application before the Municipal Committee, Dalhousie for permission to make additions and alterations to the aforesaid building and the sanction for the same was granted on 5.4.1983. At the time of the grant of sanction, the Municipal Committee had been superseded and Administrator had been appointed who passed the sanction order. According to the plaintiff, the sanction was withheld on 12.4.1983 but thereafter it was again restored on 29.4.1983 and the plaintiff started construction work on 30.4.1983 but, in the meantime, Shawinder Pal Randhawa (defendant No.3) preferred a Revision Petition under Sec. 252 of the H.P. Municipal Act, 1968 (hereinafter to be called as the Act") before the State Government (defendant No.2) assailing the order of sanction passed by the Administrator. The State Government, during the pendency of the revision petition, passed a stay order on 7.5.1983 to stop the construction and this notice was served on the plaintiff on 8.5.1983. The State Government, after hearing the parties, accepted the revision petition on 1.8.1985, whereby the order of the Administrator granting the sanction for construction was set aside on the ground that the same was against the bye-laws of the Municipal Committee. In the order, demolition of the structure raised during the operation of the stay order, was also directed. Plaintiff's further case had been that he had almost raised construction till the service of the stay order and he put temporary GCI sheets over the walls. According to the plaintiff, as the Revision Petition took much time to be disposed of, therefore, he replaced the GCI sheets, roofing of the kitchen with lintel at a cost of Rs. 20,000.00 in order to protect the construction.