IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
M.C.GURGAON – Appellant
Versus
KASTURI DEVI – Respondent
##PAGE1##
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
RSA-2668-1997
Municipal Commi%ee, Gurgaon . . . . Appellant
Vs.
Smt. Kasturi Devi . . . . Respondent
****
Reserved on: 24.02.2026
Pronounced on: 27.02.2026
Pronounced fully/opera7ve part: Fully
****
CORAM: HON’BLE MR JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA
Argued by:- Mr. Anil Chawla, Advocate
for the appellant.
Mr. Abhinav Sood, Advocate and
Mr. Nitesh Jhanjhria, Advocate
for the respondent.
****
DEEPAK GUPTA, J.
The present Regular Second Appeal has been filed by the defen-
dant–Municipal Commi)ee, Gurugram assailing the concurrent findings
recorded by both the Courts below, whereby the suit ins+tuted by the plain+ff
Smt. Kasturi Devi seeking decree of perpetual injunc+on in respect of the prop-
erty in dispute was decreed by the learned trial Court vide judgment & decree
dated 15.04.1991, and the appeal preferred by the defendant was dismissed by
the learned First Appellate Court vide judgment & decree dated 27.09.1996.
2. For the sake of convenience and to avoid any confusion, the par-
+es shall be referred to as per their status before the learned trial Court. The
record of the trial Court available on DMS has been carefully perused.
3. Subject Ma(cid:11)er of Suit : The controversy relates to a plot measur-
ing 812 square yards, forming part of Khasra No. 252/2 (3169/252 min) situated
1 of 10
::: Downloaded on - 27-02-2026 21:45:28 :::
##PAGE2##RSA-2668-1997
within the municipal limits known as 6-C, Shivaji Nagar, Gurugram (hereina>er
referred to as the suit property), which has been depicted by le)ers ABCD in red
colour in the site plan appended with the plaint.
4.1 Plain(cid:20)ff’s Case : As per the case of the plain+ff, she is the owner in
possession of the suit property by virtue of a family se)lement, whereby the
said plot was transferred to her by her husband Shri Ram Chander. It was
pleaded that Shri Ram Chander had earlier affirmed the plain+ff’s rights in Civil
Suit No. 237 of 13.3.84, decided on 30.03.1984. Shri Ram Chander himself had
become co-owner of the larger property through a sale deed dated 16.07.1963,
and in a mutual arrangement amongst co-sharers, the share comprising Khasra
No. 252/2 had fallen to his share.
4.2 It was further pleaded that the plain+ff intended to raise construc-
+on over the suit property and accordingly submi)ed an applica+on dated
01.05.1984 to the defendant-Commi)ee seeking sanc+on of the site plan along
with the requisite fee and plan. As no order was passed by the defendant within
a period of two months, the plain+ff claimed that in terms of Sec+on 205(2) of
the Haryana Municipal Act, the building plan stood deemed to have been sanc-
+oned. According to the plain+ff, in order to cover up its omission, the defen-
dant therea>er passed various proceedings and ul+mately rejected the applica-
+on for construc+on vide order dated 26.03.1985. Aggrieved thereof, the plain-
+ff preferred an appeal before the Deputy Commissioner, Gurugram, who re-
manded the ma)er with direc+ons to decide the same a>er proper measure-
ment of the plot. Measurement of the suit plot along with the adjoining plot of
Bal Kishan was therea>er carried out.
4.3 The plain+ff also relied upon an earlier decision of the Deputy
Commissioner dated 31.05.1982 as well as the report of the Town and Country
Planning Officer, which allegedly supported the plain+ff’s claim. It was further
alleged that despite these developments, the defendant intended to encroach
Page 2 of 10
2 of 10
::: Downloaded on - 27-02-2026 21:45:28 :::
##PAGE3##RSA-2668-1997
upon the suit property by fencing it with barbed wires and by installing sign-
boards trea+ng it as municipal land.
4.4 With the above averments, the plain+ff sought a decree declaring
her ownership and possession over the suit property along with a decree of per-
manent injunc+on restraining the defendant from interfering with her posses-
sion or obstruc+ng construc+on in accordance with the submi)ed site plan.
5.1 Defendant’s Stand : The defendant-Municipal Commi)ee con-
tested the suit by filin
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.