AGI Healthcare Pvt Ltd, one of the reputed and large hospital chains, received a notice from the Municipal Corporation of Ludhiana to demolish their hospital building. However, the Municipal Corporation did not act in accordance with the law due to serious deficiencies on their part.

 

GLAS Law Firm, under the leadership of Shri Bikram Singh Sidhu, assisted by Advocates Kapil Sharma, Amrinder Paul Singh, and Lakshay Garg, provided legal services to AGI Healthcare Pvt Ltd. Through their legal expertise and sincere efforts, they successfully contested a legal battle against the Municipal Corporation of Ludhiana.

 

As a result of the GLAS Law Firm’s diligent work and effective legal remedies, the demolition order against AGI Hospital’s building was withdrawn, and the site plan was ultimately sanctioned, allowing the hospital to continue its operations.


Key Judgemnts

The Honourable Civil Court complied with the judgement delivered by the Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case titled Raj Masih vs. Municipal Corporation Amritsar and anr. In this case, it was held that notices before demolition are required to be given to the aggrieved persons before demolition, i.e. the notice is to be given to both the landowner and the tenant before demolition.

The Honourable Supreme Court of India has also held in the case titled as Municipal Corporation Ludhiana vs Inderjeet Singh and another that if a Municipal Corporation demolishes a construction without proper notice to the owner, the corporation should be directed to restore the construction and recover the cost from the erring officer.

 

The Honourable Punjab And Haryana High Court in the case titled Ajai Jain vs ashok kumar jain and anr. Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 – Haryana Urban Development Authority Act, 1977, Section 18(1) and (2) – Demolition of house – Temporary injunction – Held, case of grant of interim injunction in favour of petitioner is made out on as all ingredients of first principles thereof are satisfied i.e. a) prima facie case of triable issues is made out b) balance of convenience is in favor of petition and c) demolition of house in question would result in irreparable loss – Thus, most appropriate to first carry out proper demarcation of land in question to find out as to whether house is built up on land which acquired or falls outside acquisition – Therefore, dismissal of application for temporary injunction set aside Grant of temporary injunction restored.

To Top