SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1995 Supreme(SC) 1211

K.RAMASWAMY, B.L.HANSARIA
Municipal Committee. Karnal – Appellant
Versus
Nirmala Devi – Respondent


Advocates:
Muni Lal Verma, Naresh Bakshi, S.Baggar, S.K.Bagga, Tanuj Bagga, UJAGAR SINGH

ORDER

1. Leave granted.

2. An area admeasuring 4 ft. x 6-1/2 ft. situated in Chaura Bazar near Rai Saheb Jogiwara, Karnal is claimed to belong to the respondent. The appellant asserted it to be part of a public street. They found that the respondent had constructed a shop on the said portion of a public street. Consequently, they issued a notice, after inspection, for demolition of the shop. Since the respondent did not demolish the shop, the appellant got the construction demolished necessitating the respondent to file the suit for damages. The trial court dismissed the suit by decree dated 15-11-1990. On appeal, the Additional District Judge by judgment and decree dated 29-10-1993 reversed the decree of the trial court and granted damages for a sum of Rs. 20,000. The High Court in Second Appeal No. 173 of 1994 by order dated 24-1-1994 dismissed the appeal as usual in limine, which in the recent past is getting changed by giving reasons which one hopes shall become a rule. Thus this appeal by special leave.

3. The only question is whether the aforestated disputed area is public street. Section 2(23) of the Haryana Municipalities Act, 1973 (for short, the Act), defines street thus












Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top