KANTICHAND SHARMA Vs. MUNICIPAL CORPORATION JAIPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) As questions of law falling for consideration in both these petitions are identical, they were heard analogously and are proposed to be disposed of by a common order. BACKGROUND FACTS :

(2.) A few relevant facts leading to these proceedings may be noted at the out set. A writ petition was filed by Kanti Chand Sharma (for short KC) against the Municipal Corporation Jaipur (for short MC) and others on November 18, 1996 with the averments that a plot owned and possessed by him is situated at Ambabadi Jaipur. He has been residing and carrying on business over the said plot after making construction for more than 34 years. The land in question has been surrounded by barbed wire fencing and water and electricity connections were installed over it. The open space of the said land has been covered by long and big trees. The MC issued licence in the name of KC for carrying his business. Till November 2, 1996 the said constructions were in existence but thereafter the MC smashed it and the belongings of KC were thrown in Amanishah Nalas and thereby KC was put to a loss of about 6 lacs. Certified copies of judgment and decree dated October 25, 1996 have also been annexed with the writ petition showing that a compromise decree was passed by the Court of Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division) No. 4 Jaipur City, in the LOK ADALAT whereby the MC was restrained from demolishing the constructions on the suit land and from making interference in the peaceful enjoyment and use of the suit land without adopting the due course of law and without affording sufficient opportunity of hearing to KC. It was also being averred in the writ petition that KC after he became terrified from the threatening of Shri Mohan Lal Gupta, the Mayor of M. C., wrote an application for allotment of a portion of the land of an area of 100 sq. yards and wrote whatever Shri Mohan Lal Gupta desired to write. The MC after smashing the constructions rendered KC as a homeless orphan without adopting the due course of law, which according to Supreme Court was filing of a suit for declaration and eviction by the persons or authorities who claim the ownership and title over the said land. Summary proceedings under Section 203 of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act 1959 (for short Act 1959) ought not have been adopted by the MC. It has therefore, been prayed that MC be directed not to interfere in the peaceful enjoyment of the land in question and if it claims any title in respect of the said land it be directed to file a civil suit for establishing the same.

(3.) On January 20, 1997, KC initiated execution proceedings in respect of decree dated October 25, 1996, in the Court of Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division) No. 4 Jaipur City against MC and others. Along with the execution petition an application under Order 39 Rule 1 read with Section 151 CPC was also filed. The learned executing Court treated the said application under Section 151 CPC and directed both the parties to maintain status quo with respect to land in question during the pendency of the execution petition, vide order dated Feb. 27, 1997. Against this order that the action for filing the revision has been resorted to by the MC.