Pran Nath v. The British India Corporation New Egerton Woolen Mills

RSA No.6273 of 2017 (O&M) -1IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA No.6273 of 2017 (O&M) Date of Decision.28.03.2019 Pran Nath ...Appellant Vs The British India Corporation New Egerton Woolen Mills ..Respondent CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL

Present:

Mr. Abhimanyu Kalsy, Advocate Legal Aid Counsel for the appellant.

-.- AMIT RAWAL J. (ORAL) C.M. No.16375-C of 2017 For the reasons stated in the application, delay of 34 days in filing of the appeal is condoned.

Application is allowed.

RSA No.6273 of 2017 The appellant-plaintiff in the regular second appeal is aggrieved only partial dismissal of the suit qua prohibitory injunction seeking restraint against defendants from not obstructing the plaintiff to open door in the public street.

Before the learned counsel could address argument on merit, specific question was raised as to whether the area where construction sought to be raised falls within the municipal limits, the answer was 'yes', it falls within the municipal limit of Dhariwal, Tehsil and District Gurdaspur. Neither the Municipal Committee impleaded or any evidence has been placed on record as to whether any site plan was submitted for sanctioning for the purpose of raising PANKAJ KUMAR 2019.04.08 12:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

RSA No.6273 of 2017 (O&M) -2construction, the answer was 'no'. In such circumstances, relief as sought before the trial Court and in this Court could not have been granted.

The argument of Mr. Kalsy has not been able to cut an ice to bring the case within the realm of illegality and perversity, much less, no substantial question of law arises for determination by this Court. No ground for interference is made out. Resultantly, the second appeal is dismissed.

(AMIT RAWAL) JUDGE March 28, 2019 Pankaj* Whether Reasoned/Speaking Yes Whether Reportable No PANKAJ KUMAR 2019.04.08 12:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document