Sunil Ambwani and Satish Chandra, JJ. - (1.) THIS First Appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 arises out of Original Suit No. 475 of 1995, Amir Alam Khan and Anr. v. Lucknow Development Authority and Anr. Original Suit No. 475 of 1995 dismissed by the Addl. Civil Judge (SD) Court No. 22 Lucknow dated 29.8.2009. The hearing of the First Appeal has been expedited by the Supreme Court vide its order dated 09.11.2009.
(2.) THE Plaintiffs Shri Amir Alam Khan and his mother Nahid Nigar Zaidi filed the suit against the Lucknow Development Authority through its Secretary and Narendra Nagar Housing Cooperative Society Ltd., the Defendants for permanent injunction, on the plaint allegations that the Plaintiff's father late Maharaj Kumar Mohd. Mahmood Hasan Khan was the owner of properties at different places. He was owner and in possession of Khasra Nos. 368, 369, 381 and 398 Village Seikhapur Lucknow. A notice of acquisition of these plots was received by the Plaintiff No. 2 on 20.3.1978. The dispute relates to land in Khasra No. 380 area 3 bigha 18 biswa in Village Seikhpur bounded towards east by road, towards west by 'Sarak' and thereafter House Nos. 1/41, B1/31 and B1/38 Kapurthala Bag, Aliganj Lucknow, north -road thereafter office of District Industries Centre and house No. B -4, B -7, B -8, B -9, B -10, B -11 Kapurthala Bag Ali Ganj Lucknow and towards south by Kapurthala road. It was averred in the plaint that the Plaintiff's father had executed his last Will on 2.3.1990 vesting all his immovable property including property in village Seikhapura in favour of the Plaintiff. After the Plaintiff's father death on 11.5.1993 he is the only legal heir of his father and is in possession of the property. On 11.9.1995 the employees of the Lucknow Development Authority and the representatives of Narendra Nagar Housing Cooperative Society came to the property and tried to dispossess the Plaintiff. They used abusive language. They claimed that the property has been acquired for Lucknow Development Authority and has been transferred to Narendra Nagar Housing Cooperative Society. The Plaintiff's further stated that the notice for acquisition of Khasra Nos. 368 to 389, 381 to 398 Village Seikhapur Lucknow owned by his father was given to his mother Defendant No. 2 on 20.3.1978 but the compensation for the plots has not been given to her so far. The Defendants do not have any right to interfere in the peaceful possession and use of the property in dispute. He will suffer irreparable loss, if he is dispossessed. The cause of action arose to the Plaintiff on 11.9.1995, when the Defendants wanted to dispossess him. The Lucknow Development Authority -Defendant No. 1 filed a written statement alleging that the disputed property has been acquired for the Aliganj -City and Road Extension Scheme and is vested in the State of U.P. The Special Land Acquisition Officer has given possession of the property to the Defendant. The Plaintiff is neither the owner nor is in possession of the property. Khasra No. 380 Village Seikhpur was included in the notification dated 17.3.1962, issued under Section 357 of Nagar Mahapalika Adhiniyam and thereafter by notification dated 26.4.1969 under Section 363 of the Adhiniyam. The provisions of Section 17 of the Land Acquisition Act were made applicable to the land acquisition on 31.12.1979 and that an award was declared by the Special Land Acquisition Officer on 31.12.1989. The possession of Khasra No. 380 was given to the Lucknow Development Authority on 19.4.1976 and on 31.1.1989. The suit has been filed by concealing relevant facts and suffers from defects of misjoinder and nonjoinder of the properties. The Special Land Acquisition Officer was a necessary party to the suit. The suit is also barred by limitation and is liable to be dismissed. It was further stated that the land is vested in the State Government and that possession has been delivered to the Lucknow Development Authority. The Plaintiff has not given notice under Section 52 of the Act.
(3.) THE Narendra Nagar Housing Cooperative Society -Defendant No. 2 denied the plaint allegations and stated in additional pleas that the property in dispute was acquired and is vested in the State Government. The possession was given by the Special Land Acquisition Officer to the Lucknow Development Authority. The Special Land Acquisition Officer is necessary party and has not been impleaded in the suit. The area of the disputed land shown within the boundaries given in the plaint was allotted by the Lucknow Development Authority to various persons prior to its allotment to Defendant No. 2. There are houses of various allottees situated over the land. These allottees are detailed as "B -1 plot No. 36 Smt. Vijai Laxmi, plot No. 35 Pawan Kumar, plot No. 34 Anupam Dheer, plot No. 33 Nishal Chemicals, Plot No. 32 Ajit Kumar, Plot No. 31 Smt. Usha Agrawal, plot No. 30 Smt. Madhulika Singh, plot No. 29 Radhey Shyam, plot No. 28 Smt. Uma Pandey, plot No. 27 Raja Ram, B - plot No. 15 Hari Prasad Agrawal/Raj Kamal, plot No. 14 Smt. Kamal Kishan Shukla, plot No. 13 Smt. Chandrawati Singh, plot No. 12 M.M. Manoja, plot No. 11 Dharma Mehta and Smt. Beema Mehta, D -1 Smt. Nanhi Devi, plot No. 2 Jwahan Lal, plot No. 3 Vishwaram Singh, plot No. 4 Mohd. Ahmad, plot No. 5 Savitrri Devi, plot No. 6 Ashok Kumar Nigam. These persons are necessary parties. They have not been impleaded in the suit.;