TARLOK SINGH versus MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF AMRITSAR AND ANOTHER.

Citation: [1986] 3 S.C.R. 617 · Decided: 20-08-1986 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: R.S. PATHAK · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

J.. 
A 
•. 
TARLOK SINGH 
v. 
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF AMRITSAR AND 
ANOTHER. 
B 
AUGUST 20, 1986 
[R.S. PATHAK AND G.L. OZA, JJ.) 
Punjab Municipal Corporation Act 1976: ss. 384 and 269 and 
Civil Procedure Code, 1908: 0.41, R. 27-Proceedings before District 
Judge in applicqtions, references and appeals under the Municipal 
Corporation Act-Applicability of procedures contemplated in C.P. C. 
Words and Phrases: 
Expression "as far as it can be made applicable" -Connotation 
of-S. 384, Punjab Municipal Corooration Act. 1976. 
Section 384 of the Punjab Municipal Corporation Act 1976 states 
that the procedure provided in the Code of Civil Procedure in regard to 
suits shall be followed, as far as it can be made applicable, in the 
disposal of applications, appeals or references that may be made to the 
District Judge under the Act or any bye-law made thereunder. 
A dispute between the Railways and the Municipal Corporation 
resulted in revocation of the sanction for construction of certain shops 
situated on the road along side the railway line in the city of Amritsar. 
Subsequently, the Municipal Commissioner passed an order directing 
demolition 'of these shops. The appellant, who is an allottee of one of 
these shops on licence from the Railways, being aggrieved by that order 
preferred an appeal before the District Judge under s. 269(2) of the Act. 
In that appeal, the District Judge rejected an application submitted by 
the appellant for recording of evidence. The appellant tiled a writ peti-
tion against that order before the High Court which took the view that if 
the District Judge so feels the application for recording of evidence 
could be considered under Order 41, Rule 27 of the Code of Civil 
Procedure. 
c 
0 
E 
F 
In the appeal by Special Leave to this Court on the question: 
H 
617 
618 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1986] 3 S.C. R. 
A 
Whether in an appeal tiled under s. 269(2) of the Punjab Municipal 
Corporation Act 1976, the procedure of a civil suit as provided in the 
Code of Civil Procedure will have to be followed in view of the language 
of s. 384 of the 1976 Act. 
B 
Dismissing the Appeal, the Court, 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
HELD: The lauguage used in s. 384 of the Punjab Municipal 
Corporation Act 1976 only indicates that the procedure as provided in 
the Code of Civil Procedure in regard to a suit will have to be foUowed 
in proceedings under that Act when the matter goes to the District 
Judge either by way of an application, reference or appeal. The use of 
~ 
the phrase "as far as it can be made applicable" in that section goes to 
show that it is not expected in any one of the proceedings ·contemplated 
therein-that is, applications, appeals and references-to follow the 
procedure of a suit technically and strictly in accordance with the provi' 
sions contained in the Code of Civil Procedure. It is only for the 
purposes of guidance that the procedure of a suit as Provided in the 
Code of Civil Procedure can he considered. [62 JA-B; C-D] 
· In an appropriate case whenever the District Judge feels satisfied 
he may give an opportunity to the parties to lead evidence under Order 
41, Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure, as it will be open to him to 
apply the procedure as far as it can be made applicable in the facts and 
circumstances of each case. [ 62 IE-F] 
It, therefore, could not be said that in an appeal under s. 269 
sub-cl.(2) before a District Judge the procedure of a suit as provided in 
the Code of Civil Procedure will be necessary. [ 62 IB-C] 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 2843 
of!986 
From the Judgment and Order dated 17.12.1982 of the Punjab & 
Haryana High Court in Civil Writ Petition No. 5548 Cir 1982. 
V.M. Tarkunde, Raian Karanjawala, Mrs. M. Karanjawala and 
Ejaz Mazbooi for the Appellant. 
Na unit Lal for the Respondents. 
H 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
TARLOK SINGH v. MUNICIPAL CORPN. OF AMRITSAR [OZA. J.] 
619 
OZA, J. Leave granted. 
This appeal arises out of the judgment of the High Court of Pun-
jab and I-iaryana in Civil Writ Petition No. 5548 of 1982 dated 
17.12.1982. 
The appellant is a shopkeeper occupying Shop No. 13 situated on 
the road along side the Railway Line, Golebagh site in the city of 
Amritsar. There are 56 other shops similarly situated which are oc-
cupied by other allottees like the petitioner. The premises in occupa-
tion of the petitioner and other shopkeepers are on licences given by 
the Railway since April 1981. Aft

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.