Whether civil court has jurisdiction to grant injunction in case of unauthorized construction on public property?

On going through the pleadings in the plaint, I find that there is a great substance in the argument of the learned counsel for respondent No. 1 and there is no substance in the argument of learned counsel for petitioner and respondent No. 2. It is well settled law that in order to examine the issue of rejection of plaint under Order 7, Rule 11 of CPC, on the ground of the suit being barred by law, what is required to be seen is only the pleadings in the plaint in their ordinary and natural sense without adding anything to or subtracting anything from those pleadings. It is also settled law that it is not permissible for the court to examine such an issue by looking into the documents which are not part of the pleadings in the plaint. Going by these principles, when one examines the plaint pleadings, one can easily find that these pleadings, understood as they stand in the plaint, do not oust the jurisdiction of the civil court. In para No. 4 of the plaint, it is specifically averred that while raising the construction on his own plot, the petitioner did not leave any open space on the southern as well as western side of the plot and that this construction has resulted in closing the drainage of the roof water flowing from the construction made by respondent No. 1. It is also pleaded that some portion of the offending construction is penetrating the property of respondent No. 1 and it has been carried out by demolishing the northwest corner of his house and erecting one column at this place. There is also a pleading to the effect that this construction made by the petitioner has encroached upon the right to privacy of the plaintiff.

6. Now, these pleadings when understood in their plain and ordinary sense, convey that there is a grievance which can be properly adjudicated upon only by the civil court and not by any public authority as prescribed under Section 53 of the Village Panchayat Act. Some of the reliefs claimed in the plaint are about permanent injunction and mandatory injunction which could not be granted by the public authority and granted only by a civil court.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY (NAGPUR BENCH)

Civil Revision Application No. 10 of 2017

Decided On: 21.08.2017

Damodar Dnyandeorao Sarap Vs. Haribhau Govindrao Pakdane and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

S.B. Shukre, J.

Citation: 2018(3) MHLJ 179

Print Page

Supreme Court Guidelines for assessing damages done to public property due to protests

In the absence of legislation the following guidelines are to be adopted to assess damages:

(I) Wherever a mass destruction to property takes place due to protests or thereof, the High Court may issue suo motu action and set up a machinery to investigate the damage caused and to award compensation related thereto.

(II) Where there is more than one state involved, such action may be taken by the Supreme Court.

(III) In each case, the High Court or Supreme Court, as the case may be, appoint a sitting or retired High Court judge or a sitting or retired District judge as a Claims Commissioner to estimate the damages and investigate liability.

(IV) An Assessor may be appointed to assist the Claims Commissioner.

(V) The Claims Commissioner and the Assessor may seek instructions from the High Court or Supreme Court as the case may be, to summon the existing video or other recordings from private and public sources to pinpoint the damage and establish nexus with the perpetrators of the damage.

(VI) The principles of absolute liability shall apply once the nexus with the event that precipitated the damage is established.

(VII) The liability will be borne by the actual perpetrators of the crime as well as organisers of the event giving rise to the liability - to be shared, as finally determined by the High Court or Supreme Court as the case may be.

e awarded to an extent not greater than twice the amount of the damages liable to be paid.

(IX) Damages shall be assessed for:

(a) damages to public property;

(b) damages to private property;

(c) damages causing injury or death to a person or persons; (d) Cost of the actions by the authorities and police to take preventive and other actions

(X) The Claims Commissioner will make a report to the High Court or Supreme Court which will determine the liability after hearing the parties.

Supreme Court of India

In Re: Destruction Of Public &Amp; ... vs State Of A.P. And Ors on 16 April, 2009

Bench: P Sathasivam, L Singh, D A Pasayat

Print Page