Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

       West by     :     20 feet
       North by    :     site No.45
       South by    :     30 feet

2. The case of the plaintiff is that the plaintiff is the absolute owner of the suit schedule property and the said suit schedule property originally belongs to the plaintiffs' mother Smt.Begum Jan and she executed registered Gift Deed dt.11.7.02 in the name of the plaintiff and others and the said Gift deed is registered as document No.BNG(U) JNR 2412/2002-03 in the office of the Sub-Registrar, Jaynagara, Bangalore. The said Gift deed was mortgaged for obtaining loan from Standard C.Bank. The BBMP Khatha stands in the name of the plaintiff and the plaintiff is in physical possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property. The plaintiff is paying self assessment tax with the defendants. The plaintiff also obtained sanction plan from the defendant on 12.1.01 and started construction work in the year 2002 and plaintiff has not put any new construction in the suit schedule property in the year 2012 and has put up ground plus fourth floor in the year 2002.The khatha extract clearly shows that the plaintiff has been paying property tax to the entire ground plus fourth floor and he has not put any new construction in the suit schedule property in the year 2012. The plaintiff has got electricity connection to the suit schedule property in the year 2002. Plaintiff has left all the necessary setbacks on all side of the suit schedule property for adequate natural air and light to the suit schedule property and there no objection raised by the adjacent owners or anybody else when the construction was put up. The plaintiff is enjoying the ground plus four floors from the year 2002 and he has not completed entire constructions in the year 2002. When the plaintiff completed the construction entire construction in the year 2002 the defendant not all raised any objection and they have been collecting property tax to the entire building and when such being the fact the defendant No.2 who visited the suit schedule property and inspected the suit schedule property and found deviation in the construction in the month of October 2012. Defendant No.2 have not issued any notice for having violated the sanctioned plan and putting up an un authorized construction in the year 2002 as the entire four floors was completed in the year 2002 and 2003. Defendant No.2 has not issued any notice to the plaintiff for having violated the law not initiated any proceedings against the plaintiff from past 9 years. All of a sudden defendant No.2 on 15.11.12 inspected the suit schedule property and alleged that plaintiff has constructed unauthorized construction and directed to remove all unauthorized construction in illegal manner. The plaintiff though submitted all necessary documents with the defendant No.2, but the defendant No.2 is not in a stage to verify the documents placed by the plaintiff and without due process of law defendant No.2 threats to demolish or cause damage to the suit schedule property and original sanctioned plan is with bank. On 14.12.12 defendant No.2 visited the suit schedule property along with his workmen and tried to demolish the suit schedule property without due process of law and without issuing any notice, plaintiff along with his friends resisted the interference of defendant No.2 and issued legal notice dt.15.12.12 to the defendant No.2 through Advocate. The said legal notice dt.15.12.12 is duly served on the defendant No.2 and after service of legal notice on the defendant No.2, defendant No.2 has kept quit all these days and defendant No.2 along with his officials visited the suit schedule property and all of a sudden on 30.6.15 defendant No.1 along with his officials visited the suit schedule property and directed the plaintiff to remove the construction put up in the suit schedule property without issuing any notice, illegal manner made attempt to disposes the plaintiff from the suit schedule property. The plaintiff approached the police but police failed to take any action against defendant No.2, finally plaintiff with support of local withstand with the defendant No.2 intends to take action against the suit schedule property and the same can be strictly in a manner known to law. The defendant No.2 has not issued any notice from 2012 to till today and not visited spot and not verified the records and in any illegal manner declared the plaintiff put up unauthorized construction though the building plan very much available construction though the building plan very much available with the defendant No.2 inspite of same the defendant No.2 without any basis alleged that the plaintiff had put up illegal construction in the year 2012 and under the guise of removal of the alleged deviation the defendant No.2 once again on 1.7.15 interfered with peaceful possession of the plaintiff. The attempt on the part of the defendant No.2 is illegal and the same is nothing but a misuse of the official machinery. Defendant No.2 interfered with peaceful possession of the suit schedule property of the plaintiff. Plaintiff issued notice under Section 482 of KMC Act to the 2nd defendant on 15.12.12, but till today no notice is issued to the plaintiff and defendant No.1 by the 2nd defendant. Defendant No.2 and his officials without due process of law in contravention of law forcibly trying to dispossess the plaintiff from the suit schedule property and till today no action has been taken against the plaintiff under the law. Since from 30.6.15 the Defendant No.2 is making illegal attempt to dispossess the plaintiff from the suit schedule property and plaintiff is in lawful possession of the suit schedule property. Unless the defendant No.2 made proper investigation and proper report under proper of due process of law the defendant No.2 and his officials have no right to dispossess the plaintiff from the suit schedule property and cause damage to the suit schedule property. Defendant No.2 and his men approached the plaintiff on 1.7.15 and threat to demolish the suit schedule property or cause to damage to the suit schedule property and there is an imminent threat to the legal rights of the plaintiff. Hence, the plaintiff is constrained to file the present suit for the above said relief's.

3. After issuance of the suit summons, the defendantx appeared before this Court on the date fixed for appearance and filed written statement denying the entire plaint averments in toto and contended that it is empowered to stop unauthorized construction and also to initiate proceedings for removal and demolition of deviations and initiate proceedings for removal and demolition of deviations and unauthorized construction of the building. It is further constructed that the plaintiff has not come to the court with clean hands for seeking the discretionary relief of perpetual injunction. The plaintiff has suppressed the true facts in order to protect the unauthorized construction with deviations in the building put up on the schedule property as against the approved plan and license. That since there were deviations in the construction under taken by the plaintiff, this defendant authority has also issued notices to the plaintiff under Section 321(1) and (2) on 19.12.2012. The plaintiff cleverly without disclosing of the serving of the notices as said above and by suppressing the said facts, his filed the present suit. The suit is not maintainable and is liable to be rejected a when the confirmation Order is passed, the Civil Courts have no jurisdiction to entertain the suit and the remedy lies as per Section 443 of KMC Act and the prayer at (A) and (B) are liable to be rejected. Under these circumstances it is prayed to dismiss the suit.

13. On perusal of evidence of PW-1 it reveals that he is the absolute owner of the suit schedule property by virtue of the registered gift deed dt.11.7.02 executed by his mother Smt.Begam Jan and the said original Gift Deed dt.11.7.02 was mortgaged with Standard C.Bank, obtained loan and as such the original documents are deposited with the said bank. The BBMP Khatha stands in the name of the plaintiff and the plaintiff is in physical possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property. The plaintiff is paying self assessment tax with the defendants. The plaintiff also obtained sanction plan from the defendant on 12.1.01 and started construction work in the year 2002 and plaintiff has not put any new construction in the suit schedule property in the year 2012 and has put up ground plus fourth floor in the year 2002. The khatha extract clearly shows that the plaintiff has been paying property tax to the entire ground plus fourth floor and he has not put any new construction in the suit schedule property in the year 2012. The plaintiff has got electricity connection to the suit schedule property in the year 2002. Plaintiff has left all the necessary setbacks on all side of the suit schedule property for adequate natural air and light to the suit schedule property and there no objection raised by the adjacent owners or anybody else when the construction was put up. The plaintiff is enjoying the ground plus four floors from the year 2002 and he has not completed entire constructions in the year 2002. When the plaintiff completed the construction entire construction in the year 2002 the defendant not all raised any objection and they have been collecting property tax to the entire building and when such being the fact the defendant No.2 who visited the suit schedule property and inspected the suit schedule property and found deviation in the construction in the month of October 2012. Defendant No.2 have not issued any notice for having violated the sanctioned plan and putting up an un authorized construction in the year 2002 as the entire four floors was completed in the year 2002 and 2003. Defendant No.2 has not issued any notice to the plaintiff for having violated the law not initiated any proceedings against the plaintiff from past 9 years. All of a sudden defendant No.2 on 15.11.12 inspected the suit schedule property and alleged that plaintiff has constructed unauthorized construction and directed to remove all unauthorized construction in illegal manner. The plaintiff though submitted all necessary documents with the defendant No.2, but the defendant No.2 is not in a stage to verify the documents placed by the plaintiff and without due process of law defendant No.2 threats to demolish or cause damage to the suit schedule property and original sanctioned plan is with bank. On 14.12.12 defendant No.2 visited the suit schedule property along with his workmen and tried to demolish the suit schedule property without due process of law and without issuing any notice, plaintiff along with his friends resisted the interference of defendant No.2 and issued legal notice dt.15.12.12 to the defendant No.2 through Advocate. The said legal notice dt.15.12.12 is duly served on the defendant No.2 and after service of legal notice on the defendant No.2, defendant No.2 has kept quit all these days and defendant No.2 along with his officials visited the suit schedule property and all of a sudden on 30.6.15 defendant No.1 along with his officials visited the suit schedule property and directed the plaintiff to remove the construction put up in the suit schedule property without issuing any notice, illegal manner made attempt to disposes the plaintiff from the suit schedule property. The plaintiff approached the police but police failed to take any action against defendant No.2, finally plaintiff with support of local withstand with the defendant No.2 intends to take action against the suit schedule property and the same can be strictly in a manner known to law. The defendant No.2 has not issued any notice from 2012 to till today and not visited spot and not verified the records and in any illegal manner declared the plaintiff put up unauthorized construction though the building plan very much available construction though the building plan very much available with the defendant No.2 inspite of same the defendant No.2 without any basis alleged that the plaintiff had put up illegal construction in the year 2012 and under the guise of removal of the alleged deviation the defendant No.2 once again on 1.7.15 interfered with peaceful possession of the plaintiff. The attempt on the part of the defendant No.2 is illegal and the same is nothing but a misuse of the official machinery. Defendant No.2 interfered with peaceful possession of the suit schedule property of the plaintiff. Plaintiff issued notice under Section 482 of KMC Act to the 2nd defendant on 15.12.12, but till today no notice is issued to the plaintiff and defendant No.1 by the 2nd defendant. Defendant No.2 and his officials without due process of law in contravention of law forcibly trying to dispossess the plaintiff from the suit schedule property and till today no action has been taken against the plaintiff under the law. Since from 30.6.15 the Defendant No.2 is making illegal attempt to dispossess the plaintiff from the suit schedule property and plaintiff is in lawful possession of the suit schedule property. Unless the defendant No.2 made proper investigation and proper report under proper of due process of law the defendant No.2 and his officials have no right to dispossess the plaintiff from the suit schedule property and cause damage to the suit schedule property. Defendant No.2 and his men approached the plaintiff on 1.7.15 and threat to demolish the suit schedule property or cause to damage to the suit schedule property and there is an imminent threat to the legal rights of the plaintiff.

15. It is pertinent to note that so far as the entire evidence of Pw-1 in the light of documents at Ex.P.1 to 4 and also Ex.P.5 building plan is concerned plaintiff construction his building in suit schedule property as per the photocopies produced at Ex.P.8 and 9 and its CD at Ex.P.10. In this context so far as the construction made on the ground floor and 1st floor as per the documents produced by the defendants in this case are taken into consideration i.e., copy of temporary order dt.11.12.12 under Section 321(1) of the KMC Act 1976 is concerned there is no dispute between the parties but so far as the alleged construction made by the plaintiff from 2nd to 4th floor are concerned they are in dispute that the said construction are unauthorized construction.