Gajadhar Singh And Ors vs Sandeep Kumar And Ors
2024 Latest Caselaw 10531 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Gajadhar Singh And Ors vs Sandeep Kumar And Ors on 1 July, 2024

Author: Vikas Bahl

Bench: Vikas Bahl

                                      Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:081068




RSA-4455-2002                            -1-

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                         CHANDIGARH
(101)
                                 RSA-4455-2002
                                 Date of decision: - 01.07.2024
Gajadhar Singh and others
                                                                  ....Appellants
                                   Versus
Sandeep Kumar and another
                                                                .....Respondents


CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL


Present:-     Mr. Varun Parkash, Advocate, for the appellants.

              Mr. Vivek K. Thakur, Advocate
              for respondent No.1.

              None for respondent No.2.

                          ****

VIKAS BAHL, J. (ORAL)

1. Plaintiffs-appellants had filed a suit for declaration to the

effect that the property marked A E F D is a 20' wide passage and a

further prayer for permanent injunction restraining the defendant No.1

from raising any construction over the super structure or causing any

hindrance over any part of the said passage, was made.

2. The trial Court vide its judgment and decree dated

14.05.2001 had partly decreed the suit and had observed that the

defendant being the owner of the disputed area was restrained from

raising any construction over the disputed area without getting the site

plan approved from Municipal Committee as per rules and defendant

No.2 Municipal Committee was required not to disturb the ownership of

defendant No.1 except after following and taking into consideration the

1 of 2

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:081068

relevant provisions and procedure of Punjab Municipal Act, 1911 at the

time of sanctioning of the site plan.

3. Aggrieved against the said judgment and decree, Sandeep

Kumar (defendant No.1) filed an appeal and the Additional District

Judge, Hoshiarpur, vide judgment and decree dated 08.11.2002 allowed

the said appeal and the suit of the plaintiffs was dismissed. The plaintiffs

have come in appeal against the said judgment of the Additional District

Judge, Hoshiarpur dated 08.11.2002.

4. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the

dispute in the present case was with respect to a small area, but however

in spite of best efforts, he has not been able to get the instructions from

the client whether any cause survives in the present appeal or not and has

submitted that the present appeal be disposed of as having been rendered

infructuous, but liberty be granted to the appellants to revive the same in

case any cause survives.

5. In view of the above, the present appeal is disposed of as

having been rendered infructuous.

6. Liberty is granted to the appellants to revive the present

appeal, in case any cause of action survives.

7. Registry is directed to send the copy of the present order to

the parties on the addresses mentioned in the memo of parties.

July 01, 2024                                         ( VIKAS BAHL )
naresh.k                                                   JUDGE

             Whether reasoned/speaking?         Yes/No
             Whether reportable?                Yes/No



                                    2 of 2