Municipal Corporation v. Central Mall A Registered Partnership Firm

RSA-175-2014 (O&M) Municipal Corporation, Amritsar ...... Appellant versus Central Mall A registered Partnership firm ..... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN *** Present :- Mr. Anil Kumar Sharma, Advocate for the appellant.

Mr. Akshay Bhan, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Santosh Sharma, Advocate for the respondent.

*** PANKAJ JAIN, J. (ORAL) "19 Defendant corporation was required to issue notice regarding demolition of unauthorized construction as per section 269(2) of Punjab Municipal Corporation Act, 1976 but no such notice was issued to the plaintiff by the defendant Municipal

Corporation as no copy of such notice has been produced on record by the defendant corporation. Sh.I.P.S. Randhawa DW-1 has shown his ignorance regarding issuance of notice pertaining to Unauthorized construction under Section 269 (2) of Punjab Municipal Corporation to the plaintiff by the defendant when a question was put to him in this regard. So, defendant corporation cannot demolish alleged unauthorized construction of the plaintiff forcibly and illegally without issuance of notice under Section 269

(2) of Punjab Municipal Corporation Act regarding alleged unauthorized construction raised by the plaintiff. Since, no notice was issued in this regard t the plaintiff by defendant Municipal Corporation, therefore, it cannot be said that plaintiff was required to file an appeal before the Ld. District Judge against the order of demolition because no such order of demolition of any portion of the building of plaintiff has been passed by the defendant corporation as per law.

20. In view of my above discussion, there is no illegality in the well reasoned judgment dated 23.3.2009 passed by the Ld. Lower Court Moreover, appeal was required to be filed by the Commissioner Amritsar as per of Municipal Corporation, section 394 (h) of Punjab Municipal Corporation Act, or by a person legally authorized by him in this regard as per section 408 (2) of Punjab Municipal Corporation Act. Present appeal was not filed under the signatures of the Commissioner of Municipal Corporation, Amritsar and it nowhere mentioned in the ground of appeal that a person through whom present appeal has been field is duly authorized by the Commissioner of Municipal Corporation, Amritsar to file the present appeal on his behalf. Hence, appeal filed by the appellant/ defendant is hereby dismissed with costs. Decree sheet be prepared accordingly. Record of Lower Court be returned and file of this appeal be consigned to the record room, after due compliance."

( PANKAJ JAIN ) 04.03.2025 JUDGE Pooja Sharma-I Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No