Smt.Ramawati And Others vs G.D.A.
2023 Latest Caselaw 22215 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:165786
 
Court No. - 1
 

 
Case :- SECOND APPEAL No. - 3109 of 1984
 

 
Appellant :- Smt.Ramawati And Others
 
Respondent :- G.D.A.
 
Counsel for Appellant :- , ,Abu Bakht
 
Counsel for Respondent :- A.N.Bhargava,Amit Manohar,Bratendra Singh,Kalyan Sundram Srivastava,M.A. Haseen,N.K. Sharma,N.Lal,Pradeep Kumar,Shitla Prasad,Shivam Yadav,V.D. Singh
 

 
Hon'ble Jayant Banerji,J.

1. Heard Sri P.K. Jain, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Himanshu Singh, Advocate holding brief of Sri Abu Bakht, learned counsel for the appellants, Sri Amit Manohar, learned counsel appearing for Ghaziabad Development Authority i.e. respondent no. 1, learned Standing Counsel representing respondent no. 2 and Sri P.K. Rai, learned counsel representing respondent nos. 3, 4 and 5.

2. This second appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 23.10.1984 passed by the Fourth Additional District Judge, Ghaziabad dismissing the appeal of the plaintiffs-appellants and confirming the judgment of the trial court dated 20.9.1980 dismissing the suit of the plaintiff-appellant arising out of Original Suit No. 1344 of 1971 between Mahendra Singh and others Vs. Prescribed Authority, Regulated area, Ghaziabad.

3. It appears from the record that the suit bearing Original Suit No. 1344 of 1971 was filed by Mahendra Singh against the Prescribed Authority, Regulated area, Ghaziabad, District Meerut and against the State of Uttar Pradesh through the Collector, Meerut, District Meerut seeking a relief of injunction against demolition of construction raised over Khasra No. 1565 having an area of 0-4-4.

4. It appears that subsequently, on constitution of the Ghaziabad Development Authority, under the provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 the Authority was substituted in place of the defendant no. 1. By an order dated 20.9.1980, the trial court dismissed the suit holding that the plaintiffs have not been able to prove their case. The plaintiffs then filed an appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure being Civil Appeal No. 256 of 1980 (Mahendra Singh and others Vs. Ghaziabad Development Authority and another). By judgment and order order 23.10.1984, the appeal was dismissed holding that against the order of demolition, an appeal lies under Section 15(2) of the U.P. (Regulations of Building) Act, 1958 and the jurisdiction of the Civil Court for entertaining the suit for permanent injunction could be barred in view of the provisions of the Act of 1958.

5. It appears from the record that the appeal was admitted by the order of the court dated 25.8.1998 but no substantial questions of law were framed. Learned counsel for the appellants has not been able to demonstrate any substantial question of law that may arise in the present appeal that would merit its adjudication. It is admitted to the appellants that the provisions of the aforesaid Act of 1958 are applicable in the case inasmuch as the prescribed authority who is the authority under the Act of 1958, is the defendant no. 1 in the suit. Therefore the judgments and decree of the trial and appellate courts cannot be faulted.

6. Under the facts and circumstances and due to non-existence of any substantial question of law, this appeal is dismissed.

Order Date :- 17.8.2023

Aiman