E WBi ^^:-.':.::..;^^s:]1' HIGH COURTOF JUDICATURECHHATT1SGARH : BILASPUR SINGLE BENCH : HON'BLE SHRI S.R. NAYAK, C.J. WRIT PETITION N0. 2120 OF 2006 \'8 'ik. M?S MAHESHWARI RESORT AND HEALTH CLUB PRSVAT5 Vitlage: Katulbod-Bhilai Tah & Disit. Dui-y (C.G.). Through :- Director of the ComDany Shashikant M. Damani, aged about 47 years, S/o Shri Magantal Damani, R/o 11/2, Nehru Nagar, (Wesf) Bhiiai Tahsii & Distt. Durc (C.G.) Versus Through: The Secretary, Minsitw of Surface & Transport twGVOi PiiTiQiil OT IttOiS Parivahan Bhawan, 1-Pariiament <0 •^ \., 4 5 THROUGH :- Chairman Nationa! High Way Au+hority of India 1-Eastern Avenue, Mgharani ~ Ba.i SiiW.DES-Hi THROUGH : Seci-etar^, Housing & environment Mantralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, G.E. Road, Raipu.- (C.G.) •j.ATTISGARH !NDUSTR!AL CORPOR.TATION(FinanceCell Through :-Deputy Genera! Manager Pandit Deen Dayai Upadhyay Nagar, Sector -4, Rir.g Road No.1, Raipur (C.G.). -SL,'- %, UMITIED 267-Ganesh Phadnavis Shawari, Nagpur-440 010 (Maharashtra) Through;- Director Shri Anand Sancheti, Shakti Kumar M. Sancheti Limited 267- Ganesh Phadnavis Bhawan Tringular Park, Dharapeth, Nagpur-440010 (Maharashtra) y^, fS"'S <*t?^B.SP-S.1f1 1 ?1^ ffi S.IS.^ ^"ifc?" .3R!F*»iS S ;NJ UANn Ur 'iNUIA Nariman Bhawan Nariman Point Throu.gh :- Generai Manaaer Present: Shri V.G. Tamaskar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri S.K. Berivi/al, iearned Standing CounseS for Ur.ion of india/respondents No.1. Shri Yashxvant Singh, tearned G.A. for the State. (Passed on 25'" Aprii, 2006) Although the writ petition runs into 41 typed pages, the crux of the grievance "f the petitioner is that on account of the action of the National High'i'ay Authority in constructing Durg bypass road, the petitioner has sustained extensive damage to its property and its income hgs been reduced drastica!!y, inasmuch as the approach road to the petitsoner- Company is biocked. In the premise of the above allegations, the petitioner self-assessing the damage in a sum of Rs.2,93,40,082.86, has sought for a direction to the respondents 1, 2, 3 and 5 to pay the above sum as damage. In addition, the petitioner has sought for a direction to the respondents to clear the blockage caused on account of the construction of bypass road. 1 am of the consicfered opinion that the dispute brought before the Court is eminently fit one to be thrashed out by the petitioner by resorting to private !aw review remedies !ike declaration, injunction and damages to sult hls -3- grievance. !t is needtess to state that in order to grant rsiief, the Court has to adjudicate upon the facts, decide in the .first instance whether the actlon of the respondents in constructing Durg bypass road has vio!ated any of the lega' rlghts / easementary rights of the petitioner and if so, what is the damage sustained by the petitioner-Company on account of the construction of the bypass road resulting in the alleged blQckage of the ipproach road to the petitioner-Resort. Such a dispute cannot be resolved on!y on the basis of ths affidavits and countsr affida\dts, in a summary proceeding under Article 226 of the Constitution. !n that view of the matter, I dec!!ne to entertain this writ petition. The writ petition is according'y dismissed, feaving open a!l the contentions raised in this writ petition to be agitated before the Civil Court in the event of the petitioner-Company choosing to institute a suit 'n the Civi! Court, as indicated above. No costs. Sd/- ChiefJustice f.*t