- (1.) The present petition is directed against an order dated 2.8.2016 passed by the Civil Judge, (Senior Division)/Fast Track Court Ghaziabad in Original Suit No. 1006 of 1995 (M/S Karchop Oversiez v. Noida and others). The said suit had been filed by the petitioner seeking permanent injunction against the defendants restraining them from evicting the petitioner/plaintiff from disputed plot no.33, Block-A situated in Sector 58, Noida, Pargana and Tehsil Dadri, District Ghaziabad (in an area of 800 square meter).
(2.) In the original plaint, the petitioner claimed to be valid allottee of the aforesaid plot being in possession thereof as on date. As per the plaint assertion the said plot was allotted to the petitioner/plaintiff vide allotment letter dated 16.10.1990. The allotment or the lease was made for a period of 90 years vide registered lease deed executed on 14.1.1991 and the possession of plot was handed over to the petitioner/plaintiff on 16.1.1991. As per the lease deed, the plaintiff was required to pay the entire consideration in installment. It is contended in the original plaint that there had been no default on the part of the plaintiff and as per conditions in the lease deed, constructions were required to be raised by the plaintiff within the period of 24 months from the date of obtaining possession. In case of any default on the part of the plaintiff/allottee, the Noida authority would be authorised to realise enhanced fee to extend the time for raising construction. It is contended that the plaintiff had paid installment uptil December, 1994 with interest and had always been willing to pay extention fee as per the condition of the lease deed.
(3.) It is admitted that the plaintiff could not raise construction within the time given in the lease deed on 14.12.1994. A letter was issued to the petitioner asking him to surrender the plot as he did not raise construction. Reply to the said letter was given by the petitioner on 31.1.1995 asking Noida Authority to give some more time, explaining the reasons for his inability to raise construction. However, vide letter dated 18.3.1995, the Noida Authority had cancelled the allotment made in favour of the plaintiff, information of which was received by the plaintiff vide letter dated 12.5.1995. It is asserted that when the officer and employees started interfering in the possession of the plaintiff over the suit property, cause of action for filing the suit arose. The simplicitor relief of permanent injunction has, thus, been sought with the assertion in the original plaint that the Noida Authority had no right to cancel the lease granted in favour of the plaintiff and to transfer the possession of the plot to any third party.;