MUNICIPAL BOARD SHRI MADHOPUR Vs. NAND LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE suit out of which this second appeal by the defendant No. 1 Municipal board, Shri Madhopur arises was instituted by the respondent No. 1 Nandlal in the court of Civil Judae. Neemka Thana for recovery of Rupees 2000/- as damages on account of the alleged illegal demolition of the walls constructed by the plaintiff on the land in dispute measuring 47 1/2' x 22 1/2' situated in the town of Shri madhopur. The plaintiff's case as set out in the plaint was that he had been in possession of the land and had constructed the walls on it with the permission of the Municipal Board. Shri Madhopur. It was alleged that the defendant No. 2 jasdish Prasad, who was the Chairman of the said Board out of malice of the plaintiffs walls demolished by force on 20-7-1958. It was therefore, prayed that a decree for Rs. 2000/- as damages for illegal and wrongful demolition of the plaintiff's walls be awarded both against the Municipal Board as well as Jaedish prasad, the then Chairman of the Board.

(2.) JAGDISH Prasad did not appear to contest the suit and was therefore proceeded against ex parte. The Municipal Board, however, resisted the plaintiff's suit and pleaded that the plaintiff's walls had not been demolished illegally, and that in any case if the Chairman Jagdish Prasad had done the same illegally, the Municipal board was not liable for any such act of Jagdish Frasad done without its authority.

(3.) AFTER recording the evidence produced by the parties the learned Civil Judge dismissed the plaintiff's suit by his judgment and decree dated 31-10 1962. The plaintiff filed appeal in the Court of District Judge. Jhunihunu who by his judgment dated 8-4-1964 set aside the judgment and decree by the trial court and granted a decree for Rupees 1000/- in favour of the plaintiff against both the defendants on account of damages for demolition of the plaintiff's walls. Consequently, the defendant No. 1 Municipal Board. Shri Madhopur has come in second appeal to this court and the respondent-plaintiff Nandlal has also filed cross-objection under order 41, Rule 22 Civil P. C, with a prayer for increasing the decretal amount to rs. 2000/-as prayed in the plaint.