Case Note & Summary
The respondent, Laxminarayan Jaiswal, claimed to have purchased plot nos. 71 and 72 within the limits of Gram Panchayat Drugwada on 16-12-1985. Subsequently, the territorial limits of the appellant Municipal Council were extended, bringing these plots under its jurisdiction. On 26-5-1995, the Municipal Council issued a notice to the plaintiff stating that the plots were reserved for a primary school and that the plaintiff had put barbed wire fencing without permission, calling for its removal. Prior to this notice, the Municipal Council had allegedly removed the fencing. The plaintiff issued a notice under Section 304 of the Maharashtra Municipal Council Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Township Act, 1965, and filed a suit for recovery of Rs.70,000/- as damages for the illegal removal. The defendant Municipal Council pleaded that the plots vested with it and were reserved for public use, and that the suit was barred by limitation under the Act. The trial court framed issues and held that the defendant wrongfully removed the fencing, decreeing the suit. The first appellate court partly modified the decree, directing payment of Rs.70,000/- with 6% interest. The defendant filed a second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The High Court framed a substantial question of law regarding limitation. The court found that the cause of action arose on 26-5-1995 when the fencing was removed, and the suit was filed on 25-3-1996, beyond the six-month period prescribed under Section 304 of the Act. The court held that the suit was barred by limitation and dismissed it, allowing the appeal. The court did not decide on the merits of the illegality of the removal.
Headnote
A) Limitation - Suit against Municipal Council - Section 304 of Maharashtra Municipal Council Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Township Act, 1965 - The suit for damages for removal of fencing was filed beyond six months from the date of cause of action, i.e., the date of removal of fencing on 26-5-1995, and was thus barred by limitation under Section 304 of the Act. The court held that the suit was not maintainable as it was filed after the prescribed period of limitation. (Paras 1-12) B) Tort - Illegal removal of fencing - Municipal Council - The plaintiff claimed that the Municipal Council illegally removed barbed wire fencing from plots reserved for a primary school. The trial court and first appellate court held the removal to be wrongful, but the High Court did not decide on the merits of the illegality as the suit was dismissed on limitation. (Paras 2-12)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the suit for damages filed by the plaintiff was barred by limitation under Section 304 of the Maharashtra Municipal Council Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Township Act, 1965, and whether the removal of fencing by the Municipal Council was illegal.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the judgments of the lower courts, and dismissed the suit as barred by limitation under Section 304 of the Maharashtra Municipal Council Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Township Act, 1965.
Law Points
- Limitation
- Tortious liability of municipal council
- Section 304 of Maharashtra Municipal Council Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Township Act
- 1965
- Cause of action
- Notice under Section 304
