Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 736 (HP)

Prithvi Raj v. Cantonment Board Dalhousie Cantt.

2016-05-10

DHARAM CHAND CHAUDHARY

body2016
JUDGMENT : Dharam Chand Chaudhary, J. Petitioner is plaintiff in the trial Court. He claims himself to be in possession of shop No.1, Cantt. Fund Market, Tagore Chowk, Dalhousie, District Chamba He has received notice dated 27.2.2015 whereby the Chief Executive Officer of Dalhousie Cantt. has called upon him to deposit due and admissible professional charges and water charges amounting to Rs.12,924/- within seven days and also to vacate the shop in question so that the same can be auctioned as per the decision taken the Cantonment Board. 2. The complaint is that immediately after the notice aforesaid served upon the petitioner-plaintiff, the respondent-defendant-Board started threatening through its agents and servants to dispossess him from the shop in question forcibly. The apprehension of the petitioner-plaintiff, therefore, is that he is likely to be evicted from the shop in question without following the due process of law. He, therefore, has filed the suit for permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the respondents-defendants through their agents and employees from dispossessing him unlawfully from the shop in question. 3. Petitioner-plaintiff, admittedly, is in possession of the shop in question. As per the settled legal principles, a person in unauthorized possession of any property and for that matter even a tres-passer cannot be evicted there from except for observance of the due process of law. 4. Learned Assistant Solicitor General is fair enough while submitting that the petitioner-plaintiff will be evicted from the shop in question on observance of due process of law. 5. The machinery to dispossess the petitioner-plaintiff from the shop in question is provided under the Public Premises Act. The defendant-Board, therefore, can initiate ejectment proceedings against him under the provisions of the Act ibid. Therefore, the suit itself will stand disposed of with a direction to the respondents-defendants not to dispossess the petitioner-plaintiff from the shop in question except for the due process of law. This petition and the suit both stand disposed of accordingly. Learned trial Court to pass a formal decree in the suit on receipt of the copy of this judgment. An authenticated copy to learned trial Court for compliance and being taken on record.