- (1.) The plaintiffs are in appeal against the judgment and decree of both the Courts below by which their suit for permanent injunction has been dismissed.
(2.) All the plaintiffs, espousing a common cause, filed suit for permanent injunction to restrain the defendant-Improvement Trust, Amritsar (for short "the Trust") from putting on sale or in any manner alienating the land forming part of plots no.1, 2, 2-A, 3, 3-A, 4 and 5, outside the Hall Gate, Amritsar, in terms of Section 24 of the Punjab Town Improvement Trust Act, 1922 (for short "the Act"). All the plaintiffs have claimed that they are sitting tenants for more than two years on their respective plots over which they have constructed their shops and as per the Scheme, the land underneath their shops has been acquired. As per the Land Disposal Rules of the Trust, the plaintiffs are the 'Local Displaced Persons" and have a preferential right to acquire the plots under their tenancy as it is not required by any other department of the Punjab Government. They have claimed that being the sitting tenants, they are entitled for allotment of the plots at reserved price and since the Trust wanted to sell the plots to the other persons, the suit had to be filed.
(3.) While contesting the suit, the defendant raised objection that the suit for injunction is not maintainable; property in dispute has been duly acquired; there was no obligation on the part of the defendant to allot plots to the plaintiffs, who have no legal right to enforce in the Court of law and are not entitled to the injunction, as prayed for. It was denied that the plaintiffs are the tenants in the plots under the Municipal Committee, Amritsar, as alleged, as the plaintiffs paid merely license fee and not the rent; notice under Section 24 of the Act was duly published, objections were invited, considered by the State Government, while approving the Scheme and notifying the same. The Trust gave notice in writing under Section 45 of the Act, regarding the Nazul land in question, vested in the Municipal Committee, called Municipal Corporation, Amrisar, as of now. It was also pleaded that even if the plaintiffs are proved to be tenants, their case is not covered under the Land Disposal Rules framed by the defendant and also denied that any promise was extended to the plaintiffs to allot the plots to them.;