Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

KHUSHI RAM versus GRAM PANCHAYAT VILLAGE ROLLOAN AND OTHER

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Khushi Ram v. Gram Panchayat Village Rolloan and other - CR-3600-2006 [2006] RD-P&H 3848 (7 July 2006)

C.R. No. 3600 of 2006 (1)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

C.R. No. 3600 of 2006

Date of Decision:7.7.2006

Khushi Ram ....Petitioner.

Versus

Gram Panchayat Village Rolloan and others ....Respondents.

Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Hemant Gupta.

Present: Shri Parminder Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner.

JUDGMENT

The challenge in the present revision petition is to the order passed on an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC, whereby plaintiff-petitioner has sought restraint order against the defendants from construction of a drain in his property.

Both the Courts have declined such application by returning a finding that the drain is sought to be constructed in a rasta of 7-1/2 feet wide. It has been found that in the sale deed dated 8.3.1983 produced by the petitioner in respect of the purchase of the property, a rasta of 7-1/2 feet is shown on the southern side of the site. It is the said rasta over which drain is sought to be constructed by the Panchayat for the benefit of the village community.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that the Panchayat has admitted the correctness of the site plan produced by the plaintiff, wherein the rasta shown in the sale deed is infact reflected as a private rasta. A perusal of the written statement filed by the Panchayat C.R. No. 3600 of 2006 (2)

shows that grant of such certificate is said to be an act of misrepresentation and that the Sarpanch alone without any resolution has no right to issued such certificate.

Keeping in view the fact that in the document of title produced by the plaintiff himself, the rasta of 7-1/2 feet is shown on the southern side of the site, I do not find any ground to interfere in exercise of the revisional jurisdiction of this Court so as to restraint the Panchayat from construction of a drain which is meant for the welfare of the village community.

Hence, the present revision petition is dismissed.

7.7.2006 (Hemant Gupta)

ds Judge


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.