RSA No. 852 of 2007 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA No.852 of 2007 Decided on : 30-03-2009 Parle Biscuits Limited, Dehli Rohtak Road, Bahadurgarh through its Account Officer Sh.S.N.Verma ....Appellant VERSUS District Town Planner, Jhajjar and another ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER Present:- Mr. Rakesh Nehra, Advocate for the appellant Mr. O.P.Sharma, Additional A.G., Haryana. Mr. Sanjay Chauhan, Advocate for respondent no.2. MAHESH GROVER, J Concededly plaintiff-appellant had filed a suit seeking invalidation of the notices issued to him by the Municipal Council and the District Town Planner, requiring him to deposit compounding fee for the illegal structure that he had raised in the premises of his factory. Learned Trial Court decreed the suit of the plaintiff-appellant by observing as follows:- “Keeping in view the above discussion and reasons set out on the foregoing issues, the suit of the plaintiff is decreed with the effect that the notice dated 4.12.98 and 31.12.98, issued by the defendants are illegal, null and void and the plaintiff firm shall deposit the alleged fees as per direction of the defendants be given on the application made by plaintiff firm and defendant no.1 is entitled to get the alleged fee and RSA No. 852 of 2007 2 fine. The remaining prayer of the plaintiff, if any, stands declined. No order as to costs. Decree sheet be prepared accordingly. File be consigned to record room.” Before recording the aforesaid findings, in concluding lines of para no.14 , the learned Trial Court has observed as under:- “it is concluded that Municipal council, Bahadurgarh is competent to receive the alleged fee be deposited by the plaintiff-firm. It is also directed that defendants will co-operate to each other as non-cooperation between them have caused the financial loss to the State Exchequer. The defendants are directed to issue fresh notices Ex.DW1/B, Mark A and B issued by defendant No.2 stands cancelled and accordingly, issue No.1 is decided in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants.” The District Town Planner who was arrayed as defendant no.2 in the suit filed an appeal ostensibly challenging the aforesaid findings by which the amount of fees was directed to be deposited with the Municipal Council. The appeal was accepted. The judgment of the learned Trial Court was set aside and the appeal was disposed of with the following directions:- “Consequently, in view of the above discussion, the appeal is hereby accepted and findings of the learned Trial Court are set aside and the suit of the respondent/plaintiff is dismissed and appellant/defendant is allowed to proceed with the notice dated 4.12.98 in accordance with law. Decree sheet be prepared accordingly. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.” RSA No. 852 of 2007 3 The plaintiff-appellant has filed the instant regular second appeal and has contended that he is willing to pay the fee but because of the ambiguity and confusion created by the aforesaid judgments, he does not know with which authority amount has to be deposited by him. Learned State counsel for respondent no.1 has stated that in view of the fact that it is only the District Town Planner which has chosen to file appeal after recording of the findings by the learned First Appellate Court and no appeal has been filed by the Municipal Council, it is apparent that the findings recorded by learned First Appellate Court which affected the Municipal Council have been accepted by it and therefore, the amount be deposited with the District Town Planner. Municipal Council-respondent no.2 is represented by a counsel who has not objected to it and has not been able to explain the aforesaid position of their not filing any appeal. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, I am of the considered opinion that the contention as raised by the learned counsel for the State of Haryana is correct. Municipal Council has not chosen to file any appeal against the findings recorded by the learned First Appellate Court which were apparently against them and which required the appellant to deposit fee with the District Town Planner. Since the findings have already been accepted by the Municipal Council, in fact there is no occasion for the appellant to come up in appeal and he should have straight-way accepted the findings of the learned First Appellate Court and deposited the requisite amount before the District Town Planner. Learned counsel for the appellant states that he is still ready to do the needful. In this eventuality, the instant appeal is disposed of with a RSA No. 852 of 2007 4 direction that the appellant should deposit the amount as demanded of him within a period of two months from today with the District Town Planner. March 30 , 2009 (Mahesh Grover) rekha Judge