- (1.) Cm No. 6801-C of 2015 Notice of motion. Mr. Sumit Gupta, Advocate, accepts notice on behalf of respondents 1 and 2. Heard counsel for the parties. Keeping in view the reasons which have been mentioned in the application which is duly supported by the affidavit of the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Karnal, the present application is allowed. Delay of 102 days in filing the appeal stands condoned. RSA No. 2699 of 2015 Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment and decree dated 18.01.2012 passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Karnal, whereby the suit filed by the respondents 1 to 4-plaintiffs for permanent and mandatory injunction restraining the appellant-defendants from denotifying TP Scheme No. 36 dated 29.05.1985, Notification Exhibit P-1, stands decreed, appeal against which preferred by the appellant-defendants 1 and 2 has been dismissed by the Additional District Judge, Karnal, on 30.07.2014.
(2.) It is the contention of learned counsel for the appellant that the TP Scheme No.36 as notified on 29.05.1985 Exhibit P-1 was required to be implemented within a period of five years and since the implementation has not been given effect to within the stipulated period of five years which would expire on 28.05.1990, the scheme was recommended to be denotified by the Municipal Council by Resolution No.25 dated 26.07.2007. In support of this contention, he places reliance upon Section 203 (6) of the Haryana Municipal Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the '1973 Act') and thus, contends that the judgments and decree passed by the Courts below cannot sustain.
(3.) On the other hand, learned counsel for respondents 1 and 2, states that the contention of learned counsel for the appellant cannot be accepted in the light of bare reading of the provisions of the statute which in fact are in the positive term casting a duty upon the appellant-defendants to implement the scheme within a period of five years. For the lapse committed by the appellant-defendants, they cannot be given the benefit of the same, specially when 90% of the scheme had been implemented and the remaining was in progress. He contends that more than one thousand houses have been built under the scheme and the respondents themselves have also after the year 2004, constructed three streets as per the said scheme. He, thus, contends that the findings recorded by the Courts below, both on facts and the decision on law, are fully justified which would not call for any interference by this Court.;